‘Encouraging the theory and myth’

I recently read the following passage, in Captain Sidney Jary’s excellent book, ’18 Platoon’:

“It has become the custom for some of our younger military writers to extol the professional ability of the Wehrmacht whilst decrying that of our own fighting arms, particularly our armour and infantry. This has perplexed me because it runs contrary to my experience. My 18 Platoon were better soldiers than any we fought. So was “D” Company and the whole 4th Battalion, The Somerset Light Infantry. Admittedly it was a good battalion but I find it hard to believe that it was unique.​

This tendency among writers is understandable. They are too young to have taken part in the operations about which they write and therefore they have had to rely mainly on official records and personal interviews with those who were present. Official documents so often contain “the story for the record”. Written after the battle, they are extraordinarily incomplete and sometimes too subjective. Interviews with old soldiers, whatever their rank, can also be misleading. Memory fades or becomes distorted and, particularly with the British, little thought has been given over the post-war years to battles long ago. Sadly, interviews with all but a few ex-infantrymen must necessarily be of limited assistance because very few of them survived long enough to have much to contribute…​

…Although they lost, the German soldiers and their families are proud of their exploits, many of which were considerable. It is, of course, very much in their own interest to encourage the theory and myth that, although superior as fighting men, they were beaten only by numerically superior forces and firepower. In my experience this was not so. In many attacks the prisoners we took outnumbered our attacking force and German units who would continue to resist at close quarters were few indeed. Unlike us, they rarely fought at night, when they were excessively nervous and unsure of themselves. Where we patrolled extensively, they avoided it. I can remember only one successful German patrol and not one successful night action.​

If our positions had been reversed, I doubt if they would have performed better than we did. Without doubt, some Wehrmacht formations were extremely professionally competent but many were not. Some of the enemy infantry fought with fanaticism but most did not.”

While this obviously pertains to the Second World War, and the way certain types like to salivate over the ‘military brilliance’ of the SS and Wehrmacht, I think the extract has some interesting parallels to the way some are still desperate to portray the Boers.

I found this line especially pertinent: ‘It is, of course, very much in their own interest to encourage the theory and myth that, although superior as fighting men, they were beaten only by numerically superior forces and firepower. In my experience this was not so’.

Who would ever have imagined it: a defeated people, being absolutely determined to come up with any and all excuses to explain away losing a war they started, and cooking up myths of somehow being superior fighting men to those who bested them; clearly arrogance and misplaced pride trumps showing any humility or contrition… now, where have we seen that before?