bob lembke

Rick; In post # 5 you only identified a few officers of the regiment. Am I missing something, or do you have access to Prussian Ranglisten? The 1914 issue had the entire officer corps of the regiment as of May 6, 1914, their seniority, posts within the regiment, decorations, usw. I have about 30 or so Prussian Ranglisten for many dates from 1879 to the 1926 Ehrenrangliste covering 1914-1918, so let me know if you don't have access to this info. (Or did I just fly to an incorrect conclusion?) Bob Lembke

Chip; I have to mention a sad loss. A few months ago I made a few purchases from a German dealer, seemed to be a nice lady, and they were sent registered mail, and dissapeared in the post. One was a Militaer=Pass from Jaeger=Bataillon Nr. 3; one a photo of four Prussian Feuerwerk=Offiziere in 1906, a great photo; and two other not important photos. All the prices had been quite reasonable. I am interested in Jaeger=Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 3, so I really wanted the Pass, and as my grand-father was a Prussian Feuerwerk=Oberleutnant in 1906, the men in that photo almost certainly were known to him. If I get a Pass from Jaeger=Bataillon Nr. 3 or Jaeger=Regiment Nr. 3, I will happily share it with you. I have been buying very little stuff lately, except for books (just paid $280 for a book in Germany, ouch), but I think that I will start again. Bob Lembke

I have about 35 Paesse and copies of say 15 others, plus a few Soldbuecher, mostly ones that came paired with the same soldier's Militaer=Pass. I have studied about 25-30 in considerable depth, mostly writing a 1-2 page summary of them. (A dealer/collector had about 12, and sent them to me, asking me to study them in detail and write the summary, and keep 2-3 of my choice. I did so happily, and was fascinated to see how they would sell with the paired summary, but was disappointed as he evidentally loved them so much that he did not put them up for sale, but kept them in his collection.) But I have been aware from them for a good while, and have only bought 2-3 in recent years. I recently looked again at my father's Militaer=Pass, which I am delighted to have. Addressing the original question, while being too lazy to actually pull out several and look at them, but rather fly on memory, it seems to me that the proposed effort might be more complicated than thought. I had often noticed, to my surprise, that the blank Militaer=Paesse were printed by private firms, not the Army or Government, and that they sometimes or always bore a number, like "Form Nr. 134", which suggests to me that they might have many different texts. I or someone will have to pull out several and just look at them and compare the text. (Mine are locked away in a safe place and would be a bit of a process to get to.) I see that this thread mentions resources that I have never heard of, and will have to look into. These documents could provide a tremendous source of historical data, if there were cooperation between collectors. I even have the outline of an organization/agreement that might allow this to happen, but I am not so self-sacrificing to put a couple of years of my life into trying to get such a project off the ground, as I seem to be running out of them. Bob Lembke

Recently read a primary source about a German MG unit, which was armed with the MG 08, but had a few enemy MGs in reserve, both French and Russian, not trophies, but as reserve weapons. Reading about Gallipoli, and one of the German naval MG detachments had lost almost all of their maxims, but Turkish infantry conter-attacked Brits and were able to present the naval detachment with 13 captured Vickers guns, and the MG detachment was back in business. The Germans, mid-war, used a fair amount of Russian artillery, both the 76.2 mm parapet gun, somewhat modified, as infantry guns (but the barrels quickly wore out, the Russian steel was poor), and heavier Russian guns as divisional artillery. Not sure of the caliber. In 1915 the Germans captured thousands of guns when they captured several very large fortresses. Used first Danish Madsen LMGs and then Lewis guns in special LMG units. My father's unit used French LMGs. The Germans had a very active program, with dedicated officers and units, to salvage enemy material and scrap in general from the battlefield. Two-thirds of the "German" tanks were refurbished Mark IVs. Bob Lembke

I believe that this is the third of the three major styles of "dog-tags" produced by the German Army during the war, so it probably was produced mid-war or later. I believe that the second line is his "official" home address. Bob Lembke

Joe; I immediately decided that I want your book when it came to my attention. Exhibit crass commercialism and tell me/us how best to buy it in the US. I saw some exotic posts about postage to New Zealand, usw. Your book seems to fit in perfectly into the large gap in my understanding in this area. Bob

Gentlemen; I am finally writing up my history of my grand-father. He was of peasant origins, but was made an officer in the Prussian Army in 1893, although he was very poor. About this time he acquired a wife, apparently a woman of some wealth, with whom he had a child, but whom he did not live with. Eventually she got angry at him, it was the minor matter of a second family closer to the Kaserne (from which I came from), and the dear woman mailed my grand-father poisoned food, and he was partially paralyzed, and had to resign as an active-duty officer. Being pragmatic, he pursued her civilly instead of criminally, and evidentially achieved quite a good settlement in the courts. I think I remember reading that there were marraige bureaus or brokers who matched poor young German officers with affluent women, the woman getting the husband and the status of his officership, while the officer received some financial support to maintain him in his regiment. Am I correct? Anyone have details, and/or have good leads on sources on this topic? (Language unimportant) I really should learn more about the officer class, sociology, etc. I would like to, in advance, express my appreciation for the help I have received from the extremely knowledgable and well-referenced "reference gnomes" on this forum. After working on about five books in parallel for several years, I am sprinting forward and hope to get this one out before I drop dead. My father and grand-father did some quite interesting things militarily in and about WK I, but the sociology of their complex family life (nothing like multiple families and poisoned dandelion wine to richen the broth) is also quite a tale. I just, a day ago, made a breakthrough in the story of my mysterious aunt, who was murdered shortly after the war. If Glenn J is reading this, I just ordered a copy of the remarkable Feuerwerker book published in 1936, that you obtained a few years ago. As you may remember, my grand-father retired as a Feuerwerk=Major a. D. , and wrote one of the articles in the book. Bob Lembke

In regard to the fighting that Rohr did in December 1915, I have considerable material on the fighting, which was on or near HWK in the Vosges, and none of the sources state clearly whose FW were being used here and there. Using nuances of expression, several sources suggest that on the Schratzmaennele Rohr attacked on December 15, 1915 using their own FW, but on December 22/23 and on December 24, 1915 Rohr attacked on or near HWK using FW that, in the way the sources wrote the passages, suggests that the FWs they used came from another unit. In regard to the fighting on the 24th the phrase "cooperated with small flame-throwers" was used, suggesting, to me, FW from another unit. The French also used at least one FW defensively at the same point. Sounds quite dramatic; FW vs. FW on the peak of a (small) mountain. Bob Lembke

Tom; Perhaps you remember, several centuries ago, I was ordering a copy of Theune from the German National Library, and I asked if you wanted me to order one for you as well, and you declined, and I imagine later got a copy or probably an original from somewhere else. I have to confess that I have not to this day actually read it right thru, although I have poked thru it and used it in one way or another, even though I probably have averaged reading German for at least two hours a day for years and years. Some day. Although S=B Rohr in fact rarely fought as an entire unit, but usually sent out sub-units to stiffen other attacking units or carry out specific difficult tasks, and therefore in fact usually operated much as Garde=Reserve=Pionier=Regiment (Flammenwerfer) did, it got a very focused public identity, while G=R=P=R never got the same sort of recognition, although it was the first storm unit (In the context of WW I, of course), and was also the largest. One factor might have been both the secrecy which often obscured the flame warfare and also the distaste that many, including some German officers, had for the flame weapon. (Much preferring getting disemboweled by shards of steel, I imagine, or drowned in mud or something.) When you read Graf von Schwerin's history of Storm=Battalion Rohr (he was its long-time Adjutant, and wrote the history, as Rohr had died at an early age.) and notice him almost never mentioning the battalion's use of Flammenwerfer, even when the weapon took a major role in an engagement which he described in some detail. Of a very prominent (and very literate and large) aristocratic family, with real estate named for them, he very likely had a considerable distaste for the weapon, and therefore did not mention it. Bob Lembke

I forgot to add that the Abteilung Rohr was only made a battalion (quite a large one) on April 1, 1916, over a year after Reddemann had been ordered to form a battalion based on Abteilung Reddemann in March 1915. Bob Lembke

Tom; The comments attributed above to Theune are very odd indeed. What could Theune have meant by saying that the regiment {Garde=Reserve=Pionier=Regiment (Flammenwerfer), I presume} "evolved from" Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) ? It is 2:35 in the morning, so I may not have all of the dates nailed down 100%. But Hauptmann Dr. Reddemann was ordered to form the precursor of G=R=P=R, Flammenwerfer Abteilung Reddemann, by the War Ministry in December 1914. In January 1915 10 hand-pumped flame-throwers were ordered, as the suitability of the existing Fiedler devices was uncertain. On February 1, 1915 FW Abteilung Reddemann traveled to Aachen to get their trucks and trailers from Mannesmann, and on February the Abteilung took to the field to launch their first flame attack. The attack at Malancourt was launched on February 26, 1915, and was a signal success. The ten newly ordered wooden hand-pumped flame-throwers, and two Fiedler gas-powered FW broke the French line, and four lines of French trenches were taken, with 1911 POWs, 33 MGs, 7 mortars. Two of Reddemann's men fell, seemingly not in the assault, but due to later French artillery fire. In March Reddemann was ordered to High Headquarters and ordered to form an entire flame battalion. What was the time-line with Sturm=Bataillon Rohr? The precursor of S=B Rohr, Abteilung Calsow, was formed on the Firing Range Wahn near Cologne on March 4, 1915, comprising two pioneer companies and an infantry gun detachment with 20 Krupp infantry guns of a new design. The purpose was to test the new guns and some associated equipment. The Abteilung was preparing some positions at or near the front, but had not engaged in combat yet, when the French launched a major attack on June 16, 1915. Detachment Calsow was rushed to the area of the attack and ended up getting quite badly shot up in its baptism of fire. The new Krupp guns proved unsatisfactory; the pioneer companies launched a counter-attack and suffered over 75% casualties. Hauptmann Rohr of the Guards Rifle Battalion took over the Abteilung on September 13, 1915. Rohr began filling out the Detachment, adding a MG platoon on October 18 and a platoon of mortars and a flame-thrower "platoon" sometime later, perhaps in November. But already on October 11, 1915 the Detachment had its first combat under Rohr, before it received its own MGs, mortars, of flame-throwers. However, in this attack, on the Schratzmaennele, Abteilung Rohr was supported by heavy flame-throwers from Reddemann's flame-thrower battalion, which at this time was building up from a battalion of four flame companies to a rediculous battalion of nine flame companies a few months later. It might be added that although the flame-thrower detachment Rohr received about November 1915 was described in the best source on all this as a "platoon", the same source later describes it as the "Flammenwerfer (Klief)=Trupp", or "Flame-thrower Squad". In the entire war this flame squad only lost 14 men, and I believe that it never was commanded by an officer, but by a senior NCO. My best guess is that the "Trupp" was probably a Halb=Zug, or about 30 men, for most of the war. As S=B Rohr eventually grew to a strength of about nine combat companies, the largest storm battalion, this small number of flame-throwers was often not sufficient, and Rohr had to borrow whole platoons of flame-throwers from Reddemann's flame regiment. My father, a flame-thrower operator in Reddemann's G=R=P=R, was detailed several times to S=B Rohr to provide flame-thrower support to supplant Rohr's few FW at Verdun. (He loved "working", as he put it, with Rohr's really professional storm-troopers, as much as he (perhaps unfairly) detested the ordinary German infantry.) I could go on, but I think that the above narrative clearly shows that Reddemann's formation preceded the formation of Storm-Battalion Rohr, that at all times Reddemann's formation was larger than S=B Rohr, ending up at about 14 companies for most of the war, and its 12 flame field companies dwarfed Rohr's (perhaps) half-platoon of flame-throwers. Reddemann's regiment had an entire Research Company, which alone was six or eight times as large as all of Rohr's flame formation. Reddemann had a modern workshop with the regiment in France that manufactured much of his weapons, including some flame-throwers (there were components that he could not make in the field) and a special light 76 mm mortar that only weighed 20 kilos and could be rapidly carried in the assault. I think that it is nonsensical to think that Rohr's half platoon of flame-throwers were developing the theory and tactics for Reddemann's flame regiment, when Reddemann was carrying out flame attacks more than a half year before Rohr got his first flame-throwers, and when Reddemann had about 3000 flame soldiers, and Rohr about 30, and had to borrow more from Reddemann. Perhaps Theune was smoking some of that famous California medical "weed" when he made those rather odd assertions. I always had a good opinion of Theune. (These assertions sound a bit like the odd belief that never goes away that storm-trooper tactics were developed in Russia in late 1917 by von Hutier, when he actually had to borrow West Front storm troops and FW troopers to train his men and carry out his attacks.) Tom, can you give us some specific citations for Theune's assertions? Are they in Sturmtruppen und Flammenwerfer ? Bob Lembke

Just noticed the link to the info on von Stephani, Regiment Potsdam, usw. Thanks. Any more leads on von Stephani received with great thanks. Bob

Hardy; Do you have the Solomon book? I think that I have a bit of it photo-copied, several years ago, but I don't recall that article. I will have to decend into the files to see what I have. As I probably told you, my father fought in the Potsdam Regiment at the Vorwarts building in January 1919, and also in the activity later in that year, but then I am not sure if it was with the Potsdam Regiment, which was folded into another Freikorps unit. Von Stephani was quite a character. Anyone know of a source of information on him? He was a major far-right leader later in the 1920's. My father told me details about how many Spartakists that they actually shot when they took the building; right-leaning writers do not mention it, left-leaning writers indicate that all 300 prisoners were shot, which seems to be far off. Bob

Joe; Congratulations! Something which is sorely needed; even those of us who have studied Imperial Germany for years often scratch our heads over one thing or another. Will certainly engineer getting a copy. Bob Lembke

Christian; In the 1914 preuss./wuerttem. Rangliste there are, under von Gersdorff, four Hauptleute, one Rittmeister, five Leutnante, and one Amtsrat. Can you give us a bit of a clue, like a regiment, or an exact age, or a branch of the army; Infanterie, Artillerie, usw.? Or a hometown, which might indicate his regiment? Welcome to the Club! Bob Lembke

I have a Militaer=Pass from a machine gunner from Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) , given to me by a kind e-friend, and my study of it indicates that this unit had its machind gunners supplied to it by some outside entity. Possibly a machine gun school that also acted as an Ersatz=Abteilung? Anyone have any idea on this? The question surely also bears on this storm unit. Hardy, the photo is fantastic! Bob

I have a copy of a Militaer=Pass of a machine gunner of Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) , given to me by a kind e-friend, and the impression I had from studing it was that the machine gunners were supplied to this unit by some sort of outside entity. Possibly a MG school that also acted like a Ersatz=Bataillon? Anyone have an idea on this? Bob Lembke

My father described it in a bit of detail, but I will wait till I publish it to state his words. But he was very, very impressed. He described success in less than a minute, maybe 30 seconds. (Obviously not all the time. But the concept of the "infantry gun" or "accompaning battery" became more and more important in the German Army as the war went on, and often had remarkable success.) He loved fighting with Rohr, due to their professionalism. He had a low and probably unfair opinion of most German infantry, as he found them unreliable, and gave me explicit example incidents. But to some degree that opinion is reflected in the history of the flame regiment; they generally preferred to do a job themselves, if possible. Bob

Very nice photo. Quite an interesting and important unit. I also have come across mention of the unit going to France and being inserted in fighting, although the instance that I saw was not overly exotic combat, if memory serves. The Pioniere generally conducted field-testing of weapons, even those belonging to other established branches. A good example is the origins of Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) , when an Abteilung Caslow of Pioniere was formed to field-test a new Krupp 37mm infantry gun. As Rohr evolved they always had a battery of such guns, eventually trying out four or five different different types of gun. (One of the ones they really favored was a Russian 76.2 mm rampart gun, which must have been captured in large numbers at the several great forts captured in Russian Poland in 1914-15, reworked somewhat, for example with better German sights.) My father fought with Rohr several times, and the most vivid thing he told me about the unit was the efficiency and effectiveness of their infantry gun battery, which he said could knock out a MG nest in seconds. Bob Lembke

Many thanks, everyone. I had never seen the term, I think. Looked odd. Bob

Thanks, Gilles; I think that you may be right. Did not think of it myself. On their march they had been harrassed by strafing and bombing aircraft, including at night by aircraft dropping powerful parachute flares. At this time they were rapidly forming and disbanding units to meet immediate needs. So such a formation would be a welcome marching companion. Bob Lembke

I have just finished reading a regimental history of Infanterie=Regiment Nr. 30, and as the German troops are marching back to Germany in late 1918, they are joined by " 1./Flamga 918 " and two battalions of field artillery. What sort of unit might that be? Rings no bells in my belfry. Bob Lembke

Von Hutier was certainly a very skilled general. At Riga he employed 84 Flammenwerfer teams from Garde=Reserve=Pionier=Regiment (Flammenwerfer) , brought from the West Front for the assault. This unit (actually its predecesor, Abteilung Reddemann) started developing its very special tactics, with much emphasis on infiltration, starting about February 1915, and Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) (again, actually its predecessor) started working on similar tactics a few months later. At Riga von Hutier captured 8900 men, 200 MGs, and 325 cannon, and a lot of very vital terrain, hundreds of square kilometers. But the units I mentioned started developing these tactics 2 1/2 years earlier. Bob

Hi, "General"; Yes, but the infiltration tactics were developed two years before Riga on the West Front, and a year or more before Riga East Front generals were borrowing storm-troops trained in these tactics to come east and lead important attacks using these tactics. However, your qualification about "large scale" is useful; the density of defenses in the west were so high that such tactics could probably not be used on a very large scale there. But everyone repeats the stuff about him developing these tactics and that is nonsense. Even for the Battle of Riga he borrowed storm troops from the West Front for his successful attack. Garde=Reserve=Pionier=Regiment (Flammenwerfer) and Sturm=Bataillon Nr. 5 (Rohr) developed these tactics in 1915. I note that you mentioned this in a way that indicates that you are merely reporting that everyone mentioning von Hutier mentions that stuff, not that you necessarily believe it. Not trying to be argumentative here, just hopefully informative. And welcome to the Forum! Gruss aus Philadelphia, Bob Lembke

Without digging out my father's Militaer=Pass, from memory he was a member of II. Garde=Pionier=Ersatz=Bataillon three times, for a total of almost a year, first being trained there, but later training other Flamm=Pioniere, as his Pass shows that after his worst wound at Verdun he was medically declared "fit for combat, but not Flammenwerfer", and was sent back to II. G=E=P=B, probably to train recruits. I actually have images of about 30 men from the Replacement Battalion (one photo is a group photo that is a PC that his buddies sent him when he was away from the unit), including a very good one of my father, in his best uniform, when he was a member of this unit but probably after he had been at the front with the flame regiment, and none of the images show any of the men of II. G=P=E=B wearing a Totenkopf, including my father. You would think that my father, having already fought at the front with the flame regiment, and probably possessing one or more of the patches, would have worn it on his best uniform on a home visit, if it was allowed. Bob Lembke