A Question for Moderator Stephen...

[McCulloh]

Stephen, where did you get the award numbers for the EK that you put in your most excellent book? We are discussing noncom EKs over in imperial and the subject came up (ok, I cited you).
Thanks,
JeMc

[McCulloh]

#2

Ahem...
Stephen, please clear out your mailbox! I can't pm you.
Ta,
JeMc

[TerryG]

Shame you cannot get us an answer as it is an interesting question.

[Stephen Previtera]

I based my numbers on several factors. First, old documents, some, coming from unit histories and some coming from the archives at the Rastatt military museum library. Others came from published sources, for example we know from 1914-18 the approximate number of awards per year as I did a running estimate per month, then added them up. Also, I utilized the number of men under arms at any given period and factored a percentage for how many potential recipients would receive any given award. Many numbers have been known for years, either as estimates or specific tabulations. Some numbers had never before been published. For example I needed to estimate the Wiederolungsspange (1914 bar) . Based on the known number of 1870 EK II awards, I estimated the number of living recipients and then the possible useful functions of an elderly man of say some 60 years. My number was approximated at 2,000. Recently, documents were discovered that listed the actual number as 890 or so. So I was double the correct amount, but at the time I had no other reference to go by and some published estimates were as high as 4,000. I attempt to be liberal with my estimates as I know the number awarded has a direct impact upon the value of an award today for collectors. I know that if ten of some decoration was awarded there are or at least were 150% of that decoration in existence as individuals tended to own more than one of any award they had earned. So my numbers are based partly on averages, recorded facts and published data.
Stephen

[McCulloh]

Thanks for answering! Can you elaborate on the 1914 noncom EK figures?
Rick L. knew that there were @6,000 ek2s awarded "on black/white ribbon" for noncombat personnel in the military. I've always wondered where that number came from.
Also, I'd be interested in knowing about the EK1 WW1 figures. Is there a sum total somewhere?

[Chris Boonzaier]

I think period docs are a difficult thing to use here.

David Gregory and myself are doing a different thing with WW1 docs, pooled we have over 300 EK docs and over 300 Militär passes.

a graph of awards would show an upward curve as the war progresses. The iron cross may have been liberally awarded, but for the mosr part it was to old soldiers. Unless a soldier did something really worthy of a gallantry decoration he was more or less on the company waiting list for the decoration.
If the amount of awards in late 17-18 rose, it was simply because they were rewarding guys who had been in action for 2-3 years and earlier awards were not really done on this basis (not to the same extent at least). also factored into the equation must be the difference in amounts of EKs awarded to "Assault Division" Regiments and Regiments in simple line holding divisions, as well as the amount of time these units spent in certain sectors of the front (the Somme in 1915 and the Somme in 1916 had totally different faces and hence different opportunities to win EKs), and whether they had stints of Eastern front duty where some units saw very little action.

I think IBM would need to develope a special program to crunch the numbers here.

[McCulloh]

Chris makes some good points here. Factoring in the navy-where the EK2 was awarded quite liberally at Jutland etc. and my own observations-the EK2 was awarded to probably @40%+ of all those in uniform. I sort of disagree with his statement about a single act of bravery however. There are lots and lots of examples where the medal was bestowed for a single act of gallentry. The was a lot more action in 1917/18 than there was in 1915.

I have the award lists for a number of smaller units-notibly a Bavarian artillery unit published in 1919, a squadren of dragoons, a Landsturm battalion that spent most of its time in Poland and a RIR battalion- and to my surprise significant numbers of men who were in uniform in 1914 got nothing!
The Bavarians awarded their own MMC3X less liberally than the EK2 (and this conforms to my own photographs of reunions in the 1930s), but award of an EK2 did not automatically mean a Bavarian award.
The officers and senior NCOs got the majority of EK1s and on occasion one sees a lowly Gefreiter or Unterofficier on the list-but these were less than 5% of EK1 awardeds by my own calculations

[Chris Boonzaier]

Chris makes some good points here. Factoring in the navy-where the EK2 was awarded quite liberally at Jutland etc. and my own observations-the EK2 was awarded to probably @50%+ of all those in uniform. I sort of disagree with his statement about a single act of bravery however. There are lots and lots of examples where the medal was bestowed for a single act of gallentry. The was a lot more action in 1917/18 than there was in 1915.

I have the award lists for a number of smaller units-notibly a Bavarian artillery unit published in 1919, a squadren of dragoons, a Landsturm battalion that spent most of its time in Poland and a RIR battalion- and to my surprise significant numbers of men who were in uniform in 1914 got nothing!
The Bavarians awarded their own MMC3X more liberally than the EK2 (and this conforms to my own photographs of reunions in the 1930s). The officers and senior NCOs got the majority of EK1s and on occasion one sees a lowly Gefreiter or Unterofficier on the list-but these were less than 5% of EK1 awardeds by my own calculations

Hi Jeff,
I have found a couple of "you want an EK you had better get in line" references, and a few days ago found an officer who wrote he was happy to be able to award EKs for specific acts in the last few days, pushing the awards through ahead of the "routine" awards.
Zoeberlein was hopping mad when some older guys in his unit got the cross before him because they were old timers (but never in action) and he was in the thick of it (with various single acts of bravery)and got nothing (initially).
The 2 volumes of letters from soldiers KIA make a number of snide remarks about the award process.

So far I have abut 320 award docs, only one has a specific citation and a couple mentionspecific actions.

I do totally agree that there are crosses, how many we will never know, that were awarded for specific acts of bravery. I have many docs where you can surmise this, one of a handful of survivors from a company in the front line on the first day of the Somme, doc awarded a week later, assault on Höhe 304, doc awardfed a few days later, participation in the "beachparty", award a few days later etc etc.

But there are also many where the guy went through Verdun, Somme, Flanders and got his cross after 4 months in a quiet sector in 1917 or 18.

if we consider that specific acts of bravery wre often rewarded right away, then many of the late in the day awards seem to be working through the backlog of good soldiers who deserved the cross.

Pretty much like the Honour clasp was awarded for a single act of bravery and a D.K.i.G. for an accumulation of brave acts of a lesser degree.

Another thing to take into account... British literature is full of citations and mentions of how and why someone got his award.... german books lack that to a very large extent. I am struggling to think of any examples in all the books where (other than in books like "why we got our iron cross" ) average EK2 winning soldiers talk about a specific action that got them their award...

I would disagree about your 1915 being quiet remark. We tend to judge "quiet" by what happened on the British front because most of our histories deal with that, but if you include the Eastern Front, Champagne and certain sectors of the Vogesen there was a lot of action indeed.

All the best
Chris

[McCulloh]

1915:
Quiet-well in comparison to Verdun, the Somme, the collapse in Russia, Rumania and the Kaiserschlacht....
By the way, it's my impression that 1918 produced @30% of all awards. Do you also see this?

[Stephen Previtera]

I think what Chris is attempting is exactly right. He has a collected pool of 300 docs. Now I am not a math wiz but look at the tools he has before him; for example dates and units. Invaluable for calculations and finding averages. As he stated, the number of awards (all awards for that matter, on all sides of the conflict) increased dramatically as the struggle came to term. Let me illustrate with an excerpt from the book I am now completing on the Pour le Merite. I will quote a paragraph (unedited).
"In August, 1915 – exactly one year after the First World War began – more Pour le Mérites were awarded than in the last five months of 1914. In one month, April, 1918, the number of decorations bestowed surpassed all that had been given in the year 1915! While the total number of military Pour le Mérites earned in the First World War would be modest by the standards of past Hohenzollern rulers, Wilhelm exponentially increased awardings with each successive year between 1914-18. In fact, 1918 saw more blue and gold crosses presented than in all previous years of war combined. This followed a familiar pattern."
This is a good illustration as we know the exact number of PLMs and it is a manageable case study. It is a fact and stands to reason that all decorations should follow a similar pattern, including the EK. But if I only had a cross-sample of documents, ala Chris, by date and unit I could research the written documents and unit histories to find that I had many more 1918 docs than 1914, 15,16 etc., see which units were involved in which battles or administrative roles on a certain date and come up with a reasonable estimate as to the grand total of awards. Now you have to have a pretty thick dossier to pull from, but I would say 300 is sufficient. It will be interesting to discover Chris's results as he delves deeper.
SP

[McCulloh]

As a follow up I did a quick perusal of some regimental histories this evening and found seven references to EK2s being awarded for trench raids, gernading/"silencing an MG" and/or capturing prisoners. I own a Militarpass for a signalman who specifically was awarded his EK2 for participating in night-time trench raids at Verdun in 1916.
In the "Kreigstagebuch der 1 Batterie 5 Bay Fussart Rgt.": 614 men were in the unit 1914-1918. Of these, 12 were awarded the EK1-all in 1917 or 1918. Of these, 8 were Officers, Officer Candidates or Feldwebel Lt.s. 240 EK2s were awarded, of which 65% were awarded in 1917-1918. 126 Bavarian MVKXs were awarded. Over 40% of those who got an EK2 also got a MVKX.
Of the Officers (21 total), 8 got EK1s, 20 got EK2s (everybody but the vet) and 24 Bavarian Awards were given (one chap, Lt. D.R. Anton Hoffman,-the painter?- got 3 different awards)-mostly Bavn. MVO4xs.
178 were KIA or WIA and 1 was MIA. They were in action mostly on the Western front.

[Chris Boonzaier]

As a follow up I did a quick perusal of some regimental histories this evening and found seven references to EK2s being awarded for trench raids, gernading/"silencing an MG" and/or capturing prisoners. I own a Militarpass for a signalman who specifically was awarded his EK2 for participating in night-time trench raids at Verdun in 1916.
In the "Kreigstagebuch der 1 Batterie 5 Bay Fussart Rgt.": 614 men were in the unit 1914-1918. Of these, 12 were awarded the EK1-all in 1917 or 1918. Of these, 8 were Officers, Officer Candidates or Feldwebel Lt.s. 240 EK2s were awarded, of which 65% were awarded in 1917-1918. 126 Bavarian MVKXs were awarded. Over 60% of those who got an EK2 also got a MVKX.
Of the Officers (21 total), 8 got EK1s, 20 got EK2s (everybody but the vet) and 24 Bavarian Awards were given (one chap, Lt. D.R. Anton Hoffman, got 3 different awards)-mostly Bavn. MVO4xs.
178 were KIA or WIA and 1 was MIA.

Hi Jeff,
I do not dispute the fact that silencing an MG etc. could lead to an EK. I have one doc to a guy mentioned in the regt history for leading a patrol a few days before the doc is dated, my point would rather be illustrated by the fact that of the 3500 EK2s awarded to Regt XXX, only a small number of men did a deed so plucky it made it into the regt history and that is the kind of stuff those writters loved to eat up.

Landwehrmann Schmidt may have shot up a machine gun nest on Hill 304, did a trench raid on the somme, and another in flanders, after which the Hauptmann says to Lt. Peterson "Good raid, any awards you want to give?"

and Peterson says "Well, Müller, Schmidt and Takahashi should get an EK, they have just done their 3rd raid and performed really well, and Jacobi is new, on his first raid, but he actually captured the prisonner in a dugout."

"Okay, Peterson, I will see what I can do.."

All my data as to when awards were made, etc etc., is safely stored on my old hard drive.... which is totally crashed.
Once I have finished the text for the book I will sit down and redo it... but it makes me cry tothink it has to be redone

[Chris Boonzaier]

1915:
Quiet-well in comparison to Verdun, the Somme, the collapse in Russia, Rumania and the Kaiserschlacht....
By the way, it's my impression that 1918 produced @30% of all awards. Do you also see this?

I will have to start my stats from zero, but when you look at how it is stored in binders than 18 makesa thich one.
Although 16-18 produced some mega battles, the kriegskalender devotes 106 of 196 pages to before dec 15. This includes Tannenberg, all the battles of the frontier, The Masurischen Lakes, LaBassee-Arras, Wilna, Tarnopol, Gorlice, Neuve-Chapelle, the 1915 Champagne battles etc.

Sure, the battles you mention are the big boys, but losses were heavy and fighting was hard in 15 as well.

I am sure we kinda agree on that, are just arguing the same point from a slightly different angle.

[McCulloh]

Sure Chris, we are discussing, not arguing here and I add my information as illustrative of my verbiage....and as you say we are saying the same thing, but from slightly different vantage points: degrees of emphasis as it were. I have the notes for a regmantal history book as compiled by some of the officers who later wrote the chapters. These notes have a LOT more events recounted (e.g. acts and deeds of Teutonic bravery) than ended up in the books. Space, even then, was a consideration.
The "inflation" of the EK2s bestowal is what I am getting at in pointing out the 1917-1918 awards.
As Stephen above notes, it got easier in one sense to get medals towards the end of the war.
What does concern me is that we still have not nailed down specific sources for some of the numbers of EK2 awards.

[Chris Boonzaier]

I have dug up all the docs I have with exact citations..

First one..

"Jaeger has served on the Regimental staff since may 1917. in this time he has proved himself to be a very reliable telephone operater and in the last days of the Flanders offensive distinguished himself with courageous, brave and unshakable actions. At all times he undertook cable patrols, repairing lines under heavy enemy fire, thereby insuring the command posts had communication with the guns and that commands and orders could transmitted. Jäger is fully deserving of the proposed award."

second one is an EK1 to a Lt. For bravery in Flanders where he led numerous patrols and used his Minnwerfers to great effect during the course of the fighting on hill 60.


I interprate them to mean that in the case of these men, the awards were given for bravery over a longer period of time, and not a specific action on a specific date.

Wheras some awad docs have a space to print why the award was given these are almost always left blank and seem to only be on early docs.

Would I be correct in assuming the following.

1) We agree there are iron cross awards for single acts of bravery.
2) We agree that there are awards for smaller acts of bravery over a period of time
3) We agree that towards the end of the war many soldiers got the cross because they had been serving for years, fighting solidly and this was only recognised late in the war, either because
a) the rules allowed it only at that stage
or
b) it took that long to be recognised as a deserving old sweat.

I would agree there is an inflation of awards in 17-18, but many factors come into play here... if we agree that awards were often made (I would vote for most often) for smaller acts of bravery over a longer period of time... then you needed to wait a bit to have that longer period. Most of the definate references on award docs to specific battles have been awards for 14.

another thought struck me... The R.I.R. 212 had wording on their docs with words to the effect of "awarded for bravery in the war from 14-15" or "awarded for bravery in the fighting 14-16" (depending on how long the recipient had been in the unit and ón the front)

There is also a bavarian Corps (have to look for the docs, I have 3-4 to units from this corps) who seemed to go on a splurge in 1916, awarding eks with the wording "in the fighting 14-16" "in the fighting 14-15" and in one instance I have a doc by the corps worded "in the fighting 14-16 especially at XXXXXX in 1914"

For me the above seem to hint at the small acts over a longer period of time.

And having said that, I do agree, I do have a number of 14-15 awards with specific battles mentioned.

Like I said, the WW1 equiv would be the Honour clasp/DKiG, the one for single acts of bravery, the other for multiple smaller ones. I think the WW1 EK encompassed both.