[ASLML] Book Query: Galicia Division

[Pete Shelling]

Adam announced:

"there are 3 books on the 14th SS Division - one each by Littman, Melnyk and
Lugosz. I'd like to know which of them is the best since I'm happy to read
any unit history and make my own mind up about it but some advance warning
would help. Melnyks book is the most expensive, followed by  Lugosz then
Littman."

There is at least one more:  "Fighting for Freedom: The Ukrainian volunteer
Division of the Waffen SS" by Richard Landwehr. (Bibliophile legion books
1985)

"Regardless of anything else I think that the fact that it's a Schiffer
publication, will give a leaning in favour of the SS. But then how many
Russians (citizens) and POWs (German/Polish etc) were sent away to Gulags
etc and never came back? I don't see the Russians being forced to admit to
atrocities etc. The Germans did it and there are museums etc where you can
read about it and see what happened. The Russians didn't lose so they admit
nothing. I don't think we'll see the Russians at Nuremburg. Just an
observation, not a flame but I'm happy to take it private if you want."

Good point, Adam, and certainly something I wouldn't disagree with. In fact,
most of what we read as history is biased one way or another, especially the
personal accounts of frontline activity. In many stories by US GIs (Most of
whom are NOT professional historians) the Germans are "Nazis in their Tiger
tanks". Now, we know that most German AFVs were not actual Tigers, and most
German (non-SS)Landsers were not likely Nazis, either. But in the mind of
the writer, these are correct assumptions, or at least good enough for his
purposes. Yet, this is often very good material for scenario designs- these
types of accounts give us good info on battlefield conditions such as
weather, the experience level and morale of the participants (at least for
one side), and the terrain. These are very important elements in ASL which
are not often described in the operational unit histories. For this, the
Schiffer books tend to be quite good.

The thing that really frustrates me with this kind of writing is that the
writer rarely cares to identify the enemy units. I guess the grunts in the
slit trenches really don't care if the T-34s swarming them were from the 5th
Guards Tank Corps or the 6th Mechanized Corps. (Not that I blame them.) For
this, we need to turn to something at the operational level from true
historians such as Col. Glantz, or those guys that write the 'Pen and Sword'
books.

Other favorites: Doug Nash (he is picking up were Glantz leaves off in the
Eastern Front)

Brits Michael Reynolds and Charles Whiting are both quite good. Although the
latter is not really a historian as much as a writer of history, I like the
way he packages the details. He brings the front lines, operational, and
political levels together quite nicely, thereby bringing a wide range of
relevant information to the reader in a style well suited to an airplane
ride (not so much time for hardcore, flipping-back-and-forth type research.)
I am currently reading his "Hemingway at War" and am enjoying it. Alas,
Whiting is a bit biased himself, as he reserves his less-glowing comments
for the US Commanders when discussing combined Anglo-American operations.
(Then again, I--like almost everyone else--read my own biases out of it the
first time through.)

I look forward to more of Rick Atkinson's stuff (after he finishes his
first-person accounts and commentary of the current conflict.)

Best of all time may be the Aussie Alan Morehead's "Desert War", which was
actually first published in three parts during the war and shortly
thereafter.

Glad to see more of the 'personal account' type of stuff being translated
from Russian as well.

Pete "so many books, so little time" Shelling


-