Classic Battlefield Tours

Sinking of HMAS Sydney On 19 November 1941, the Australian light cruiser HMAS Sydney and the German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran engaged each other in a battle off the coast of Western Australia. Sydney, with Captain Joseph Burnett commanding, and Kormoran, under Fregattenkapitän ('Frigate captain') Theodor Detmers, encountered each other approximately 106 nautical miles off Dirk Hartog Island. The single-ship action lasted half an hour, and both ships were destroyed. From 24 November, after Sydney failed to return to port, air and sea searches were conducted. Boats and rafts carrying survivors from Kormoran were recovered at sea, while others made landfall at Quobba Station, 60 kilometres north of Carnarvon; 318 of the 399 personnel on Kormoran survived. While debris from Sydney was found, there were no survivors from the 645-strong complement. It was the largest loss of life in the history of the Royal Australian Navy, the largest Allied warship lost with all hands during World War II, and a major blow to Australian wartime morale. Australian authorities learned of Sydney's fate from the surviving Kormoran personnel, who were held in prisoner-of-war camps until almost two years after the war with Germany had ended. Controversy has often surrounded the battle, especially in the years before the two wrecks were located in 2008. How and why a purpose-built warship such as Sydney was defeated by a modified merchant vessel such as Kormoran was the subject of speculation, with numerous books on the subject, as well as two official reports by government inquiries, published in 1999 and 2009. According to German accounts—which were assessed as truthful and generally accurate by Australian interrogators during the war, as well as most subsequent analyses—Sydney approached so close to Kormoran that the Australian cruiser lost the advantages of heavier armour and superior gun range. Nevertheless, several post-war publications have alleged that Sydney's loss had been the subject of an extensive cover-up, that the Germans had not followed the laws of war, that Australian survivors were massacred following the battle, or that the Empire of Japan had been secretly involved in the action (before officially declaring war in December). Currently, no evidence supports any of these theories.

Hugo Junkers - aircraft designer who refused to work with the Nazis Hugo Junkers (3 February 1859 – 3 February 1935) was a German aircraft engineer and aircraft designer who pioneered the design of all-metal airplanes and flying wings. His company, Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG (Junkers Aircraft and Motor Works), was one of the mainstays of the German aircraft industry in the years between World War I and World War II. His multi-engined, all-metal passenger- and freight planes helped establish airlines in Germany and worldwide . In addition to aircraft, Junkers also built both diesel and petrol engines and held various thermodynamic and metallurgical patents. He was also one of the main sponsors of the Bauhaus movement and facilitated the move of the Bauhaus from Weimar to Dessau (where his factory was situated) in 1925. Amongst the highlights of his career was the Junkers J 1 of 1915, the world's first practical all-metal aircraft, incorporating a cantilever wing design with virtually no external bracing, the Junkers F 13 of 1919 (the world's first all-metal passenger aircraft), the Junkers W 33 (which made the first successful heavier-than-air east-to-west crossing of the Atlantic Ocean), the Junkers G.38 "flying wing", and the Junkers Ju 52, affectionately nicknamed "Tante Ju", one of the most famous airliners of the 1930s. When the Nazis came into power in 1933, they requested Junkers and his businesses aid in the German re-armament. When Junkers declined, the Nazis placed him under house arrest in 1934 and eventually seized control of his patents and company. He died the following year. Under Nazi control, his company produced some of the most successful German warplanes of the Second World War.

The Construction of HMS Victory In December 1758, the British Prime Minister, William Pitt the Elder, requested the building of 12 ships, including a first-rate ship that would become Victory. In 1759, the Seven Years' War was going well for Britain; victories had been won on land at Quebec and Minden and at sea at Lagos and Quiberon Bay. It was the Annus Mirabilis or Wonderful Year, and the ship's name may have been chosen to commemorate the victories or it may have been chosen simply because out of the seven names shortlisted, Victory was the only one not in use. There were reservations as to whether the choice was appropriate as the previous ship of that name had been lost with all hands in 1744. Around 6,000 trees provided the timber for the ship and 150 men were required to assemble her. Of the wood used in her construction, 90% was oak and the remainder was elm, pine , and fir, together with a small quantity of lignum vitae. The frame was held together with six-foot copper bolts, supported by treenails for the smaller fittings. Once built, it was normal to cover the frame and leave it for several months to allow the wood to dry out or "season". French naval power had been severely weakened by the events in Quiberon Bay however and there was no immediate need for Victory which was left for nearly three years. This additional seasoning had a beneficial effect on her subsequent longevity. Work restarted in autumn 1763 and she was floated on 7 May 1765, having cost £63,176 and 3 shillings, the equivalent of £10.9 million today. During the 18th century, Victory was one of ten first-rate ships to be constructed.

Ship money Ship money was a tax of medieval origin levied intermittently in the Kingdom of England until the middle of the 17th century. Assessed typically on the inhabitants of coastal areas of England, it was one of several taxes that English monarchs could levy by prerogative without the approval of Parliament. The attempt of King Charles I from 1634 onwards to levy 'ship money' during peacetime and extend it to the inland counties of England without parliamentary approval provoked fierce resistance. It was one of the grievances of the English propertied class in the lead-up to the English Civil War. The Plantagenet kings of England had exercised the right to require the maritime towns and counties to furnish ships in time of war, and this duty was sometimes commuted for a money payment. Although several statutes of Edward I and Edward III, notably their confirmations of Magna Carta, had made it illegal for the Crown to exact any taxes without the consent of Parliament, the prerogative of levying ship money in time of war had never fallen wholly into abeyance. In 1619, James I aroused no popular opposition by levying £40,000 (equivalent to £7,500,000 in 2023) of ship money on London and £8,550 on other seaport towns. In 1628, Charles I, having prorogued Parliament in early summer and after he assented to the Petition of Right, proceeded to levy ship money on every county in England without Parliament, issuing writs requiring £173,000 to be returned to the exchequer. This was the first occasion when the demand for 'ship money' aroused serious opposition. As matters deteriorated in England and Scotland starting with the Bishops' War, ship money proved to be insufficient to finance the king's military needs. It was later stopped by the Long Parliament when they voted the Ship Money Act 1640. Finally, half a century later, in the aftermath of the Glorious Revolution, the Bill of Rights of 1689 prohibited all forms of extra-parliamentary taxation.

Grand Battery Grand Battery (Grande Battery, meaning big or great battery) was a French artillery tactic used during the Napoleonic Wars. It involved massing all available batteries into a single large, temporary one, and concentrating the firepower of their guns at a single point in the enemy's lines. Substituting the volume of fire for accuracy, rate of fire, and rapid movement, it was rarely used in the wars' early years. As the quality of artillery crews and their horses declined, it was employed more frequently during later (post-1808) campaigns. The Grand Battery was often concentrated against the enemy's center. An early example is at Austerlitz in 1805, when Napoleon ordered a "roar of thunder" before the main assault upon the Pratzen Heights, which split the coalition's lines in half. Another example of the tactic in use was Alexandre-Antoine Hureau de Sénarmont's aggressive use of his guns at the Battle of Friedland (1807), which was a major factor that won the battle. The same tactic was used during the Battle of Wagram in 1809, where a grand battery of 112 guns successfully halted an Austrian counterattack. At Borodino in 1812, it was again used to break a counterattack. It failed to break the strong Russian positions and earthworks in the center along the Rayevski Redoubt. At the Battle of Lützen (1813), it succeeded in breaking the Russo-Prussian center, ahead of the main assault by the Imperial guard. In 1815 at Waterloo, the famous opening barrage of the Grande Batterie failed to break the center of Wellington's Anglo-allied army due to his deployment of most of his forces behind the reverse slopes of the rolling hillside and the fact that the ground was still wet and muddy, preventing the usual effects of the bouncing cannonballs.

Nuts In December 1944, the German army launched the surprise attack that became the Battle of the Bulge. Brigadier Genera McAuliffe commanded the 101st and its attached troops. At Bastogne, the 101st was besieged by a far larger force of Germans under the command of General Heinrich Freiherr von Lüttwitz. On 22 December 1944, von Lüttwitz dispatched a party, consisting of a major, a lieutenant, and two enlisted men under a flag of truce to deliver an ultimatum. Entering the American lines southeast of Bastogne (occupied by Company F, 2nd Battalion, 327th Glider Infantry), the German party delivered the following to Gen. McAuliffe: To the U.S.A. Commander of the encircled town of Bastogne. The fortune of war is changing. This time the U.S.A. forces in and near Bastogne have been encircled by strong German armored units. More German armored units have crossed the river Ourthe near Ortheuville, have taken Marche and reached St. Hubert by passing through Hompre-Sibret-Tillet. Libramont is in German hands. There is only one possibility to save the encircled U.S.A. troops from total annihilation: that is the honorable surrender of the encircled town. In order to think it over a term of two hours will be granted beginning with the presentation of this note. If this proposal should be rejected one German Artillery Corps and six heavy A. A. Battalions are ready to annihilate the U.S.A. troops in and near Bastogne. The order for firing will be given immediately after this two hours term. All the serious civilian losses caused by this artillery fire would not correspond with the well-known American humanity. The German Commander. According to those present when McAuliffe received the German message, he read it, crumpled it into a ball, threw it in a wastepaper basket, and muttered, "Aw, nuts". The officers in McAuliffe's command post were trying to find suitable language for an official reply when Lieutenant Colonel Harry Kinnard suggested that McAuliffe's first response summed up the situation well, and the others agreed. The official reply was typed and delivered by Colonel Joseph Harper, commanding the 327th Glider Infantry, to the German delegation. It was as follows: To the German Commander. NUTS! The American Commander. The German major appeared confused and asked Harper what the message meant. Harper said, "In plain English? Go to hell." The choice of "Nuts!" rather than something earthier was typical for McAuliffe. Captain Vincent Vicari, his personal aide at the time, recalled that "General Mac was the only general I ever knew who did not use profane language. 'Nuts' was part of his normal vocabulary." The artillery fire did not materialize, although several infantry and tank assaults were directed at the positions of the 327th Glider Infantry. In addition, the German Luftwaffe attacked the town, bombing it nightly. The 101st held off the Germans until the 4th Armored Division arrived on 26 December to provide reinforcement.

Wishing you and your family a very Happy Christmas and peaceful New Year From all at Classic Battlefield Tours James, Tim, Louise, and Kate

Treaty of Dunkirk - 1947 The origins of NATO The Treaty of Dunkirk was signed on 4 March 1947, between France and the United Kingdom in Dunkirk as a Treaty of Alliance and Mutual Assistance against a possible German attack in the aftermath of World War II. It entered into force on 8 September 1947 and according to article VI paragraph 2 of its text, it remained in force for a period of fifty years. According to Marc Trachtenberg, the German threat was a pretext for defense against the USSR. This Treaty preceded the Treaty of Brussels of 1948 (also known as "Brussels Pact"), which established the Western Union among Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, which became Western European Union in 1955, after the entry into force of the Treaty of Brussels of 1954 (also known as "Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT)"), when Italy and West Germany were admitted. Since the end of World War II, sovereign European countries have entered into treaties and co-operated and harmonised policies (or pooled sovereignty) in an increasing number of areas, in the European integration project or the construction of Europe (French: la construction européenne). The following timeline outlines the legal inception of the European Union (EU)—the principal framework for this unification. The EU inherited many of its present responsibilities from the European Communities (EC), founded in the 1950s in the spirit of the Schuman Declaration.

Origins of the Hundred Years War The root causes of the conflict can be traced to the crisis of 14th-century Europe. The outbreak of war was motivated by a gradual rise in tension between the kings of France and England over territory; the official pretext was the interruption of the direct male line of the Capetian dynasty. Tensions between the French and English crowns had gone back centuries to the origins of the English royal family, which was French (Norman, and later, Angevin) in origin through William the Conqueror, the Norman duke who became King of England in 1066. English monarchs had, therefore, historically held titles and lands within France, which made them vassals to the kings of France. The status of the English king's French fiefs was a significant source of conflict between the two monarchies throughout the Middle Ages. French monarchs systematically sought to check the growth of English power, stripping away lands as the opportunity arose, mainly whenever England was at war with Scotland, an ally of France. English holdings in France had varied in size, at some points dwarfing even the French royal domain; by 1337, however, only Guyenne and Gascony were English. In 1328, Charles IV of France died without any sons or brothers, and a new principle, Salic law, disallowed female succession. Charles's closest male relative was his nephew Edward III of England, whose mother, Isabella, was Charles's sister. Isabella claimed the throne of France for her son by the rule of proximity of blood, but the French nobility rejected this, maintaining that Isabella could not transmit a right she did not possess. An assembly of French barons decided that a native Frenchman should receive the crown, rather than Edward. The throne passed to Charles's patrilineal cousin instead, Philip, Count of Valois. Edward protested but ultimately submitted and did homage for Gascony. Further French disagreements with Edward induced Philip, during May 1337, to meet with his Great Council in Paris. It was agreed that Gascony should be taken back into Philip's hands, which prompted Edward to renew his claim for the French throne, this time by force of arms.

Major Robert Cain won the Victoria Cross using a PIAT Perhaps the most famous actions involving the Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank (PIAT) during Operation Market Garden are those carried out by Major Robert Cain, of 2nd Bn South Staffordshire Regt. Cain and his men had been blocked from reaching Lt.Col. John Frost’s PARA’s at the bridge in Arnhem and had formed a defensive perimeter in nearby Oosterbeek. Throughout the battle, the British Airborne forces relied heavily on the PIAT and Major Cain put the weapon to good use. At one point during the battle, he used a PIAT, in its secondary in-direct mortar role, in an attempt to drop bombs onto a self-propelled gun which was positioned on the other side of a house. Sadly, Cain wasn’t able to destroy the SPG before his spotter, Lieutenant Meikle, was killed by enemy fire and he was wounded by falling masonry. On the 21st September, he engaged and destroyed an enemy tank with the PIAT. He then moved to take on a second tank but as he fired the bomb prematurely detonated just as it left the weapon - likely due to a faulty fuse or a misaligned bomb. Cain was wounded again being thrown back by the blast and being hit by metal fragments. Throughout the fighting, Cain displayed massive courage engaging German armoured vehicles at close ranges with the PIAT personally destroying or helping to destroy half a dozen vehicles. By the 25th Sept Cain & his men had run out of ammo for their PIATs and he began using a 2in mortar, fired at high angle, to try and hold the enemy off.  For his gallantry during the battle he was awarded the Victoria Cross, he was the only Arnhem VC recipient to survive the battle.