"Breakthrough: The Gorlice-Tarnow Campaign, 1915" by Dr. Richard DiNardo
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2024
- For too long the eastern front in World War I has remained, in Winston Churchill's estimation, "the unknown war." This book examines one of the critical campaigns of the war on the eastern front. With Austria-Hungary threatened by a possible Russian advance through the Carpathian Mountains into Hungary, Germany came to her ally's rescue. The German Chief of the General Staff, Erich von Falkenhayn, decided to commit a new army in an offensive to counter this threat. Headed by August von Mackensen and his chief of staff Hans von Seeckt, the German Eleventh Army, assisted by the Austro-Hungarian Third and Fourth Armies, shattered the Russian defenses between Gorlice and Tarnow. Advancing through the hole created, Mackensen's forces outflanked the Russian forces in the Carpathians, compelling their retreat. The offensive was steadily extended until both the fortress of Przemysl and the capital of Austrian Galicia, Lemberg, were back in the hands of the Central Powers. Turning north, "Mackensen's Phalanx," in concert with other German and Austro-Hungarian forces, was able to overrun Russian Poland by the end of August 1915. Dinardo argues that the Germans were able to accomplish this by a combination of normal infantry tactics combined with the judicious use of heavy artillery, aided by aerial reconnaissance and improved means of communication. DiNardo also suggests that the campaign marked the emergence of August von Mackensen as one of Germany's most able field commanders. Breakthrough is the first full English language study of one of the most remarkable campaigns of World War I.
Length: 67 Minutes
Lecture Date: May 6, 2010
Sadly no mention of six Russian armies led by Nikolai Nikolaievitsch advancing toward Kraków fortress in November 1914, where in the series of bloody battles that had taken place between 6th and 22nd of November 1914, Austro-Hungarian armies under command of Conrad von Hotzendorf managed to push the enemy back. Kraków fortress (Festung Krakau) was strategically even more important than Przemyśl as at the time it hinged both north and south fronts (Wrocław-Kraków and Kraków - Vienna, respectively). The plan of Russian high command was to capture Kraków fortress which, if successful, would immediately open way to heavily industrialized region of Silesia with its coal mines and ultimately towards the capital of Austro-Hungarian empire, Vienna.
Russians were hesitant to directly attack heavily fortified Kraków strongholds, thus the city had not been surrounded. 4th Army (18 battalions equipped with 114 heavy cannons) soon took advantage, left the fortress and engaged Russian forces outside the city, and in the series of bloody battles, eventually managed to push them back behind Śreniawa river. Hence, defenders gained enough maneuver space to regroup and send two corps towards Wieliczka-Mszana region where another strike was expected after Radko Dimitriev had left Tarnów with XXI Corps of the III Army. On 1st of December 1914 it captured Wieliczka and started preparing for decisive assault on Kraków fortress. On 6th December 1914, Russian attacked along Lwów High Road adjacent to Bieżanów and Prokocim hills. Had nearby strategically located strongholds fallen into Russian hands, Kraków would have been lost. At the most south-eastern forts: 50 Prokocim, 50a Lasówka, 50 & 1/2 W Kosocice i 51 Rajsko, nearly entire Kraków fortress garrison had been moved and also artillery fire from other forts had been concentrated between Wieliczka and Bieżanów village. During Russian attack, artillery from both sides engaged. The defenders fired 20000 shells, including centrally located Kościuszko fort surrounding Kościuszko Mound as thousands of shells were observed flying over the city. The counter attack consisting mainly from Polish defenders of Kraków fortress, was launched against advancing Russians. Successful, several hours long battle, where many bloody bayonet charges occured on Kaim hill situated over Bieżanów village, 10km from Kraków, resulted in Russian retreat towards Wieliczka, mainly thanks to accurate defense artillery barrage.
During the battle on Kaim Hill 2000 Russians were killed while defenders lost 900 men. The obelisk on the top of the hill was founded a year later to commemorate the fallen as well as the survival of the city and its civilian population. The front soon shifted south-eastwards and Russians never again during IWW reached as far west as they did in December 1914. The city was saved, Kraków fortress did not share the fate of Przemyśl, and Russians plans to conquer Silesia in order to pose direct danger to Vienna, never materialized. An interesting fact, there was enough ammunition in Kraków fortress for 2 more days only! It is also worth mentioning at the time Kraków fortress defense was led by Feldmarschalleutnant Karl Kuk. Overall, during the 1st and the 2nd Battle of Kraków, 1914, 400.000 soldiers were engaged on both sides, 17.000 Russian soldiers were captured, nearly 30.000 defenders were killed and wounded. Russian casualties remain undisclosed, although they are believed to be significant. Most of Kraków forts and bunkers from the era have survived to this date, including the ones taking direct part in taming Russian onslaught in December 1914. Definitely a must see for all IWW history maniacs, whenever visiting Kraków.
That's cool
Very interesting read, thanks for posting
A very interesting conference, about a little known operation. Very well exposed. :)
+Antoni Gumbau Martínez It would probably be better with sound.
Highly interesting topic... Very well presented
excellent talk.. and an even better book.
Hey, General von Falkenhayn!
Sound is still a problem.
I love lectures about the Great War's Eastern Front. This front was at the core of the war and, like it was in the Second World War, was the bloodiest front.
I really enjoyed the lecture from what I could hear, but I had great difficulty in hearing it. My volume does not go up to "11." Is there any way that the volume of Dr. DiNardo's mic be increased retroactively at the USAHEC's end? The audience mic is fine.
I think blucher only said that because he had to go poop. That's the only thing I can think of. I've passed a few elephants in my days.
I think it may be pronounced shim-me-shill
I wanted to tear my ears off every time the lecturer mispronounced Przemsyl. You shouldn't be allowed to give a lecture if you cannot correctly pronounce information. It detracted from an otherwise excellent presentation.
Funny you got it wrong, too. It's "Przemysl" (Polish: Przemyśl)
Blame it on the autocorrect. It's interesting that you missed the point entirely by being pedantic.
I appreciate your concern but rest assured I got your point right. After reading your original comment however, it's safe to assume that if there's actually anyone here that one could try and call "pedantic", it would most certainly be you:)
NR - your assumption is incorrect. Your original reply pointed out a typographical error and missed the entire point that a professional giving a professional presentation should be fully prepared. The errors made in pronouncing cities, proper names, etc diminish the entire presentation.
MK, instead of dwelling on some minor pronunciation errors I would rather focus on the essence of the lecture itself, most importantly the lack of important facts that had led to the Battle of Gorlice as well as some important facts regarding the battle itself, and the events in the aftermath of the battle, before the III siege of Przemyśl.
There are also some historical inaccuracies in the presentation: it was not a Battle of Gorlice-Tarnów, but rather the Battle of Gorlice, while Tarnów, along with other towns was recaptured later on in the aftermath of the battle, during disorganized retreat of Russian armies. Also, in relation to alleged lack of use of cavalry - apparently both Germans and Austro-Hungarians used cavalry divisions (one each) in the Battle of Gorlice. Also, there is no mention of the reason why Russians actually lost the battle. There is no mention of the fact, that heavy artillery barrage, although few hours long, failed to destroy all Russian defensive positions in the area, as Russian artillery remained silent during barrage not to give out its position. Some 11th Army units, including Bavarian 11th Division, suffered heavy losses in the area of Sękówka Valley, also some heavy street fights took place in Gorlice town (German XVI Corps) and it was no breakthrough until another few hours long artillery barrage forced Russian defenders to surrender, while fierce fighting took place on Pustki Hill, where Austro-Hungarian 12th Infantry divisions stormed heavily defended Russian positions. After many hours of bayonet charges led mainly by Polish regiments it was captured, but the losses were significant (900 men killed) So while the first day of operation was a success and first lines of Russian defenses were broken into, some 8.000 Central Powers soldiers were lost.
There are also historically inaccurate facts regarding III siege of Przemyśl in May/June 2015: "Przemyśl fortress was not match for German artillery (!)" while somehow omitting important fact that Austro-Hungarian defenders, shortly before surrender in March 1915, due to lack of food and resources while fighting for many months in complete encirclement, had blown up the fortress and had its stock destroyed to avoid it being captured by Russians. Only few minor forts remained relatively intact and were later used by Russians against advancing German-Austrian forces, although they were quickly recaptured while others simply surrendered without a fight, all this simply due to a fact, that Przemyśl fortress had been previously turned to rubble! Last but not least, there is no reference to the fact that the plan to attack specifically at Gorlice region was made by Franz Conrad von Hotzendorf, Chief of General Staff of Austro-Hungarian Army, who for many months had unsuccessfully tried to convince Mackensen to send 4 German divisions from the West, as Mackensen had long believed in the possibility of breaking through the front in the West first.
Also, while it may be true the Eastern Front during WWI has been largely an untouched territory in Western historiography - as rightly pointed out by Dr. DiNardo, mainly due to its limited Anglo-centered view - it has been however widely and thoroughly researched in the twentieth century by many Middle-Eastern European historians, including most detailed and thorough works published by local, Polish historians. It's perhaps only a matter of translating this bibliography into English which in my opinion, should be conducted by any self-respectful Western researcher approaching this subject.
So while I appreciate the subject being touched upon by Dr. DiNardo, due to above reasons, and not because of some irrelevant pronunciation mistakes (which I would gladly forgive, if at least all historical facts regarding the subject were actually served accurately) this presentation is unfortunately far from being "excellent".
Absolutely sickening how he keeps saying “CHER-MISSLE” 😂 it is a difficult one to pronounce but that is definitely not it. It’s closer to sounding like “SHEMISHL” but it’s ok to mispronounce these tricky Slavic words, it’s just Americans seem to be above and beyond in how wrong they say things