Thanks Brad. It would be nice to hear from the Army Historian. I wonder if he follows this.
-
pseudo-expert -
I am almost certain that the Army officer (SYDE) is aware of this thread, but I really doubt we will ever hear from him here in this forum, or anywhere else for that matter. He used to be very active in several blog site as an anonymous contributor, but he could never provide anything factual to back up his claim with the exception of copying/pasting excerpts from his web site and report over an over again.
In my opinion he has achieved his goal: a monument and historic trail have been erected at his spot, he got to shake hands with the York family at the spot as well as in Washington and his artifacts have been officially accepted by the US Army Center of Military History (CMH) and are supposedly going on display in the Pentagon. His name is posted on signs all over Chatel Chéhéry and regardless of what happens I doubt anyone will tear down his monument even if it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be a the wrong place – which it is.
Having realized his goals the burden is now on us to demonstrate that he is wrong, but demonstrate to who? The CMH is not interested in anything related to this subject and currently say that they have no position on the York affair even though they do by accepting the SYDE’s artifacts. They will not even look at Dr. Nolan’s case so that rules the Army out – for now anyway. Eventually enough people will see the errors of the SYDE’s research and something will be done.
Here you can find the CMH letter of endorsement, article about their acceptance of the artifacts and much more about their discoveries:
http://sgtyorkdiscovery.com/SYDE_NEWS.php
There is much more to follow from our camp in the coming months.
.Comment
-
PAGE 8 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Pages 8 is more about York taking prisoners from four different German units. This is simply not true. York did not take any prisoners from the 125th LDW as I explained in the post #524.
.Comment
-
PAGE 9 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Pages 9 we find this:
“c. Is the location in synchronization with contemporary German and American tactics techniques & procedures (TTPs)?”
The officer is using modern Army acronyms in analyzing the German deployment of machineguns and again mentions the “Humserberg” as key terrain. As I pointed out in post #522, the Humserberg is actually slight southwest of Cornay, not west of Chatel Chéhéry on Hill 167 where the SYDE says it was.
Of course the Germans used machineguns in support of offensive and defensive operations, nothing new here. However, the specific machinegun position they are referring to had nothing to do with the York fight, so the answer would NO that it could not engage the patrol.
Then we find:
“d. Is it along the flank of the German 125th and 120th Regiments?”
Actually the line the SYDE indicates was the border between the 120th LDW and the 125th LDW is pretty accurate, but once again, the 125th LDW played no part in the York fight and York did not capture any prisoners from the 125th LDW during the fight. There is no evidence that we could find anywhere that suggests the 125th was in any way involved in this fight. They list a whole slew of references at the end of their report that supposedly supports what they say, but I cannot find anything in these references that indicates the 125th LDW was involved. The only possible explanation is a misinterpretation of the statement of one of the 120th LDW officers captured by York in: "Testimony of German Officers and Men about Sergeant York." Trans by US Army War College, Carlisle, PA, June 1936, Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt.
In LT Glass’s statement (120th LDW) he is describing being marched away in a column of prisoners. He says that the came upon the “trench” filled with American soldiers and then a meadow with more American soldiers. He says additional prisoners were brought up and that is when he noticed a LT Link from the 125th LDW.
York captured 132 prisoners, but he had over 200 when he arrived in Varennes. Other prisoners captured elsewhere o the battlefield had been added to York’s column at the battalion and regimental C.P. in route to Varennes.
Here is what LT Glass said:
“Additional prisoners were brought up; it is not impossible that Corporal York gradually rolled up the 4th Company from the flank and rear. Like myself, the Americans failed to recognize Lieutenant Kubler as an officer. I also recall an elderly officer, probably Lieutenant Link of the 125th Landwehr Infantry.”
Another fact that cannot be overlooked; none of the other German officers or men captured by York who were interviewed by the Reichsarchiv mention the 125th LDW, none of the 120th LDW war diaries mention the 125th LDW and none of the German regimental histories mention the 125th LDW being involved in this specific action. On the other hand, unanimously, almost all of the German historical records say that the 1st Battalion, 120th LDW (specifically the 4th Company), the 210th RIR and the 7th Bavarian Mineur Company were the German units that were attacked in the rear and were captured or killed in the fight that took place. This is the York fight they are talking about and the 125th LDW was not involved at all.
Once again we see the Germans saying they were attacked in the flank and rear, as they mention in most of their accounts that describe this action. The SYDE version of events says that York attacked from the front and charged up the hill to engage the machineguns in a frontal attack in relation to the German direction of fire, which was oriented to the east – the direction the main attack of 2nd Battalion, 328th Infantry was coming from.
.Comment
-
PAGE 10 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Page 10 talks about the photographic evidence and they offer a photo of York standing at the site of his heroics during the 1919 investigation. It is clear to see that the terrain rises very sharply just behind where York is standing. This is not the case at the SYDE “York Spot”. There is a hill, but not one like the one we see in the 1919 photo.
This has already been shown in an earlier post in this thread, but I think important to show again. The following photographs show York at the scene of his 8 October, 1918 heroics taken in 1919 during the week long investigation. There were several other 1919 photographs taken that the SYDE does not even mention and I will talk about those on a few minutes.
For anyone who has done “then and now” photographic comparisons know that it is very hard to get the exact same shot as the “then” photo. This is due to different types of lenses and cameras and physical changes due to construction, vegetation and slope precipitation. In the case of this York photo a certain amount of slope precipitation has occurred as we found artifacts buried very deep (almost 1 meter deep) on the slope just behind where York is standing. This means that the surface of the slope is slowly sliding downward. The vegetation is also a little different than it was in 1919. We did not quiet have the right angle of the 1919 photo, but I will try and get a better shot on my next visit to the site.
Either way, the 1919 do not match the SYDE “York Spot” terrain at all. I will take some good photos of their site as well on my next visit in an attempt to find a loose match between the 1919 photo of York at the actual site and where they say York stood on that 1918 October morning.
.Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
PAGE 10 - 2007 SYDE Report (continued - 3)
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Here is a 1919 photo of the grave of four of York’s comrades killed during the fight. Next is a modern photo of the same location.
The SYDE do not even mention this 1919 photograph and it does not resemble any location anywhere near their “York Spot”.
.Comment
-
PAGE 10 - 2007 SYDE Report (continued - 4)
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
This is the 1919 photo and the modern photo of the temporary burial location of Corpora Savage.
Once again, the SYDE does not even mention this photo in their report or web site.
.Comment
-
PAGE 11 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Page 11 is where it starts getting interesting because the SYDE is now going to talk about their “archaeological” investigation.
They start with this:
“f. Is supported by battlefield archeology?”
“The Battlefield Archeology describes the whole York story. As in the craft of military intelligence, it easy to be seduced into a hasty conclusion based on the discovery of a surprise indicator or artifact that appears to support your estimate of the enemy situation or in this case the location of York’s fire fight.”
Well, did they, the SYDE, not be easily seduced into a hasty conclusion based on the reported 21 of 21 cartridges fired by York’s .45 automatic Colt? It seems the .45 cartridges were the “surprise” artifacts and they did in fact jump to some hasty conclusions, or rather put the story together to fit the artifacts they found.
In July 2008 we accompanied Mr. Mastriano to his York site to assist him in recovering more artifacts from the site. This is after he had announced his 100% certainty conclusions that he had found the exact spot York stood in 1918 and after the monument had been erected. At that time I had not done any research into the York fight and was more than happy to participate in such an important project. I also had no idea that he was illegally conducting his research as he assured all of us that he was operating with the approval of the relevant French authorities.
It was after this 4 day adventure that I began to question not only the lack of any sound methodology in the field, but how he said the fight took place. Nothing made any sense to me based on the finds we made during those 4 days. At his “York Spot” we found another .45 cartridge. Now the count is up to 22 instead of 21. The Army officer said that York probably had a fourth magazine in his pocket and that is where the 22nd cartridge came from. (The 45 caliber colt had a 7-round magazine and typically a soldier armed with such a sidearm would be equipped with a pouch containing 2 additional 7-round magazines. The 82nd Division history simply says that York emptied 3 complete magazines which would equal 21 rounds. I find it very interesting that this 22nd cartridge is not mentioned in any of the SYDE's reports or articles and during the artifact handover to the CMH you only see 21 cartrigdes instead of 22 that were actually found at the site.
This among many other things gave me reason to question what this officer was really doing. I asked many questions and each was answered with a “matter of fact – 100% - we found it answer”. My 30+ year experience of researching and collecting battlefield artifacts told me that something was very wrong here and thus why I launched my own investigation into this affair. That research later led me to Dr. Tom Nolan, who had in 2006 already identified the correct location of the York fight. I worked with and support Dr. Nolan, but I still remain an independent researcher even though I agree 110% with Dr. Nolan’s finding minus a few minor disagreements as to the “exact” position of York during the fight. The location of the fight is clearly where Dr. Nolan’s 2006 research said it was.
I will resume with Page 11 tomorrow….
.Comment
-
PAGE 11 - 2007 SYDE Report (continued)
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Here is a photo of the 22nd cartridge and another .45 projectile we found at the Army officer’s “York Spot” located just below where we are sitting here next to his monument - his York Spot. You will find no mention of this discovery in any of the SYDE’s reports or articles.
I assume he will claim we “planted” the cartridge when confronted with this, but please keep in mind that at that time I thought he had actually found the correct site. He even said to us when we found the cartridge: “Do you realize that you are holding a SGT York cartridge?” I was puzzled later when he did not update his web site with this find and other important discoveries we made during my four day adventure with him in the Argonne.
The Army officer is seen here smiling at the discovery of another one of "York's cartridges".
.Comment
-
I will pick up where I left off tomorrow....
BradComment
-
PAGE 11 - 2007 SYDE Report (continued)
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Picking up where I left off last night I want to start with another excerpt found on page 29 of the article written by Dutch historian Stephan van Meulebrouck: Hot on the York Trail, which was published by the Western Front Association in Bulletin 84, June/July 2009.
Mastriano has little patience with the claim that the SYDE destroyed its own research site. “The place where the monument now stands”, he says, “was investigated painstakingly beforehand, by hand”.
Hmmmm…… really?
.Comment
-
PAGE 12 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Page 12 starts of with another non-objective statement:
“Although the recovery of the .45 cal. shell casings alone could be considered conclusive evidence, investigators must uncover more proof to verify military activity consistent with the York story.”
The way I see it the SYDE has put all of their money on these 21 (actually 22) .45 cartridges. The reality is that .45 cartridges are found all over this battlefield, it just so happens they found a cluster of them together here. What is interesting is that they found no expended 30-06 cartridges at their “Spot”. According to the American accounts York remained pretty much in the same location throughout the fight. York himself does not mentioning moving or running up a hill to get a better shot at the Germans on the hill above him.
In York’s diary on pages 264 and 265 we find how York described his position:
“By this time, those of my men who were left had gotten behind trees, and two men sniped at the Boche. They fired about half a clip each. But there wasn’t any tree for me, so I just sat in the mud and used my rifle, shooting at the Boche machine gunners. I am a pretty good shot with the rifle, also with the pistol, having used them practically all my life, and having had a great deal of practice. I shot my rifle until I did not have any more clips convenient and then I used my pistol.”
On page 226 York says this:
“I was caught out in the open, a little bit to the left and in front of the group of prisoners and about twenty-five yards away from the machine guns which were in pits and trenches upon the hillside above me.”
On Page 227:
…..”At first I was shooting from a prone position; that is lying down….”
On Page 228:
…..”Of course, all of this only took a few minutes. As soon as I was able I stood up and begun to shoot off-hand, which is my favorite position. I was still sharpshooting with that-there old army rifle. I used up several clips. The barrel was getting hot and my rifle ammunition was running low, or was where it was hard for me to get at quickly….”
….” In the middle of the fight a German officer and five men done jumped out of a trench and charged me with fixed bayonets. They had about twenty-five yards to come and they were coming right smart. I had only about half a clip left in my rifle; but I had my pistol ready. I done flipped it out fast and teched them off, too…..”
…” I returned to the rifle, and kept right on after those machine guns…..”
From the way I see this, York stayed in basically the same position throughout the fight. The only thing York did was go from the prone to the standing position. What is really interesting is that he was using his rifle first and then switched to his pistol when several Germans charged in his direction returning to his rifle to battle the Germans on the hill above him. York says these Germans were 25 yards above him. How in the World does the SYDE version work? There are about 100 yards in between where they found the pistol cartridges in the low ground below their monument and where they found a cluster of 30-06 cartridges on the slope above the monument.
I think we will look at that in more detail shortly.
.Comment
-
PAGE 13 - 2007 SYDE Report
http://www.tac-bsa.org/ResHistTrail_...expedition.pdf
Page 13 contains photos of artifacts they found. How do they know where these artifacts came from? They certainly were not found all in the same hole. Apparently some of them might have been found together, but it is quite obvious the artifacts in situ are staged – in other words – they were placed on the ground and a photo was taken.
What I really like in the page 13 photos are the different groups of German artifacts that are listed by regiment. How do they know that? They all were found in roughly a 200 meter square area. I did not realize the German Army regimentally marked cartridges, none of those Dr. Nolan found were marked in such a way.
The point is that these photos demonstrate the amateurish methods used by the SYDE in their field research. I never saw a GPS being used and as I explained earlier artifacts were collected from very broad geographical areas and grouped together as we see here. This methodology would not withstand the lowest level of scrutiny from any archaeologist or historian anywhere.
Please compare the page 13 report artifact photos with this photo taken in April 2009. You see Dr. Nolan on the left, the French regional director of archaeology Mr. Yves Desfossés in the middle and one of Yves archaeologists on the right. Before them are some of Dr. Nolan’s artifacts laid out separately as they were found. Each artifact or group of artifacts was found at a single location, an artifact number was assigned and the spatial data (coordinates) recorded for each artifact or group of artifacts.
The second photo is of James Legg, a battlefield archaeologist from the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology cataloguing artifacts the day they were found.
.Comment
Comment