D Day through German Eyes: How the Wehrmacht Lost France, by Jonathan Trigg

[Aida1]

I pretend to have an interest in the german army about which i have read a massive amount of literature and primary sources.

And have you produced anything with all that?

I need not produce anything. I like to read on military history and have done it for decades so i am not impressed when you come up with strange opinions about what authors allegedly wrote.

[Westphalia1812]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

I agree with Mori. My French is very rusty but it's a very good book.

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

What does the introduction say?

[Aida1]

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

I agree with Mori. My French is very rusty but it's a very good book.

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

What does the introduction say?

The usual boring stuff about german commanders blaming everything on Hitler, the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO and the usual negative characterisation of the testimonies to US Army Historical division after ww2.

[Westphalia1812]

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

I agree with Mori. My French is very rusty but it's a very good book.

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

What does the introduction say?

The usual boring stuff about german commanders blaming everything on Hitler, the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO and the usual negative characterisation of the testimonies to US Army Historical division after ww2.

Well, that's much the same in modern German studies...doesn't mean its a bad book, though. It seems heavily reliant on German primary sources which sounds interesting. Maybe he dug out some things that Zetterling didn't. Probably gonna buy that one...

[Westphalia1812]

the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO

If you are interested in the behaviour of the German army in the west and if you can read German there is fantastic study by Peter Lieb dealing with the Wehrmacht in France.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=de

[Mori]

I pretend to have an interest in the german army about which i have read a massive amount of literature and primary sources.

And have you produced anything with all that?

I need not produce anything. I like to read on military history and have done it for decades so i am not impressed when you come up with strange opinions about what authors allegedly wrote.

You have a lot of experience, and it looks like you read way more pages than I did, if nothing because I am too young to compare with your decades of reading.

So, out of that extensive knowledge, what would recommend as relevant books on the German army? Let's stay on the 1944-45 Western Front, because it's this thread's topic.

[Mori]

the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO

If you are interested in the behaviour of the German army in the west and if you can read German there is fantastic study by Peter Lieb dealing with the Wehrmacht in France.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=de

That study was a breakthrough when published in 2007. It showed how German troops in France behaved the way they always did in the East, especially (but not only) against partisans.

A short article in English by the same author: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10. ... 0802197423

[Aida1]

the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO

If you are interested in the behaviour of the German army in the west and if you can read German there is fantastic study by Peter Lieb dealing with the Wehrmacht in France.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=de

Fighting against partisans is not really my subject. I am very fluent in german.

[Westphalia1812]

the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO

If you are interested in the behaviour of the German army in the west and if you can read German there is fantastic study by Peter Lieb dealing with the Wehrmacht in France.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=de

That study was a breakthrough when published in 2007. It showed how German troops in France behaved the way they always did in the East, especially (but not only) against partisans.

A short article in English by the same author: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10. ... 0802197423

Well, I would argue that some behaved worse than others (compare e.g. 11.PzDiv with 2.SS) but overall, yes they used the same draconian principles - from the East - during partisan warfare.

[Mori]

You came up with the statement that most books have a very strong pro german bias and giving a description of the alleged bias so it is up to you to support that with quotes.

This one is easy.
"Blaming everything on higher command": The German Generals Talk, by Liddell-Hart, and all the authors who subsequently quote this book.

"Reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs": Brute Force: Allied Strategy and Tactics in the Second World War, by John Ellis, and the authors he relies on and those who rely on him

"German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British": A Genius for War, by Trevor Dupuy, and all the authors who subsequently rely on this book, starting with Martin van Creveld's Fighting Power.

[Aida1]

the socalled clean wehrmacht myth supposedly needed to get germany in NATO

If you are interested in the behaviour of the German army in the west and if you can read German there is fantastic study by Peter Lieb dealing with the Wehrmacht in France.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/ ... ml?lang=de

That study was a breakthrough when published in 2007. It showed how German troops in France behaved the way they always did in the East, especially (but not only) against partisans.

A short article in English by the same author: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10. ... 0802197423

Well, I would argue that some behaved worse than others (compare e.g. 11.PzDiv with 2.SS) but overall, yes they used the same draconian principles - from the East - during partisan warfare.

Warfare against opponents not in uniform that use ambushes ,bombings ,etc.. will many times lead to draconian measures particularly when there is no way you can supposedly win hearts and minds.

[Westphalia1812]

So, out of that extensive knowledge, what would recommend as relevant books on the German army? Let's stay on the 1944-45 Western Front, because it's this thread's topic.

1944:
As already mentioned, Dieter Ose, but also others:

Die Ardennen-Offensive 1944/45: Ein Beispiel für die Kriegführung Hitlers - Hermann Jung

Die Geschichte der HGru G: Mai 1944 bis Mai 1945
- Dieter R. Bettinger

Die Geschichte der 91. Luftlande-Division: Rekonstruktion eines Großverbandes der Deutschen Wehrmacht - Helge Sven Nauroth, Boris Steinberg (modern compilation of primary sources, verly little analysis though...)

1945:
Pflicht zum Untergang: Die deutsche Kriegsführung im Westen des Reiches 1944/45 - John Zimmermann

Wehrmacht und Niederlage: Die bewaffnete Macht in der Endphase der nationalsozialistischen Herrschaft 1944 bis 1945 - Andreas Kunze

Volksgrenadier-Divisionen: Zur Geschichte und den personellen/ökonomischen Rahmenbedingungen der im Westen 1944/45 eingesetzten Großverbände – Eine Studie, Karl-Heinz Pröhuber

[Mori]

Warfare against opponents not in uniform that use ambushes ,bombings ,etc.. will many times lead to draconian measures particularly when there is no way you can supposedly win hearts and minds.

So it wasn't the German army's fault?

[Mori]

1945:
Pflicht zum Untergang: Die deutsche Kriegsführung im Westen des Reiches 1944/45 - John Zimmermann

Wehrmacht und Niederlage: Die bewaffnete Macht in der Endphase der nationalsozialistischen Herrschaft 1944 bis 1945

I read these two (the 2nd being by Andreas Kunz) and no doubt they are excellent books. High level, very reliable, and pretty intelligent.

They are not about Normandy, though. I have long noticed that there was a dead angle about "Germans in Normandy", and Leleu's book seems to be the one that clears it.

[Aida1]

You came up with the statement that most books have a very strong pro german bias and giving a description of the alleged bias so it is up to you to support that with quotes.

This one is easy.
"Blaming everything on higher command": The German Generals Talk, by Liddell-Hart, and all the authors who subsequently quote this book.

"Reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs": Brute Force: Allied Strategy and Tactics in the Second World War, by John Ellis, and the authors he relies on and those who rely on him

"German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British": A Genius for War, by Trevor Dupuy, and all the authors who subsequently rely on this book, starting with Martin van Creveld's Fighting Power.

You mention some authors with a very high reputation who have a far more complex way of expressing themselves than the simplistic way you describe their writings. And have done their research.
German commanders simply repeated after the war the disagreements they had with Hitler during the war. Theses disagreements are well documented and lead to a long list of sackings during the war.
That the allies used their massive fire superiority to obliterate german lines is a fact of history. Just look at the offensives in Normandy.
That particularly military professionals have a high opinion about the german command system which is mission based , is not surprising.