Disbanded divisions

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:12 pm

Servus,
In late '43 and '44, numerous Wehrmacht divisions were disbanded due to heavy casualties. Others were reformed in spite of repeatedly haveing heavy casualties. Was there some logic to the "rebuild vs disband" criteria or was it just the luck of the draw?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Regards,

Helmut

TPMM · Post by **TPMM** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 2:45 am

If the command of division and supply servisces were more or less intact, the division was rebuilt. It also depended from the speed of Russian offensive

Qvist · Post by **Qvist** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 11:27 am

Hm, I doubt that - most or possibly even all the divisions who were disbanded, amalgamated or used to form Korpsabteilungen in late 1943 had their command and supply services more or less intact - what wasn't used in the amalgamated units were withdrawn and used as Personalstammen for new units being formed. At that point, it was I think fundamentally a question of finally doing what the Organisationsabteuilung had been advocating since late 1941, namely adjusting the number of divisions to the capacity to maintain them. In other cases (such as the stalingrad divisions and those lost in tunisia), Divisions were reformed despite having lost their staffs and supply services. It is I think impossible to answer the question in a general way.

cheers

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 11:56 am

Qvist,
So it's your opinion that the fate of a division as to being rebuilt or disbanded was relatively haphazard. I can't say I disagree with you since I can find no logical criteria for the most part as to why some were rebuilt and some disbanded.

Thanks,

Helmut

Qvist · Post by **Qvist** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:42 pm

I wouldn't say "haphazard", but rather situational. I don't think you can find a general policy that is valid for the duration of the war.

cheers

Piet Duits · Post by **Piet Duits** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:57 pm

Hi,

From what I have read, it had also to do with the combat record of the unit in question, and the area it came from.
Did the unit perform well before it got destroyed, great change it got raised again. And incorporated the stragglers, returning sick etc. of the parent unit, as a core.

Piet

Qvist · Post by **Qvist** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:13 am

Hi Piet!

That also seems to have a played a role, I agree. F.e., it seems that it was decided to make 44.ID the first of the Stalingrad ID reformed in view both of its distinguished record and also because of its Wehrkreis (though the order doesn't state in more detail excatly what it was with WK XVII that made it particularly desirable to reform one of its divisions).

cheers

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:47 am

All of your comments make sense. I agree. Haphazard wasno the corrrect term but situational fits much better in this case.

Thank you all for your comments.

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:59 am

Hi Qvist,

there was a political dimension, as well. If remember rightly, ID 44 was the senior Austrian division in the Army. It was raised in Vienna and bore many traditions from the Austro-Hungarian Army. It was therefore a prestige formation. Similarly, 60th Motorised Division was raised in Danzig, the recovery of which was an initial declared war aim in September 1939. As Nazi prestige was therefore involved, it was rebuilt as the Feldhernhalle PzGr Division.

Generally, I would suggest that the Stalingrad divisions, the first to be lost en masse, were almost all rebuilt as a demonstration of national resilience. They formed the core of the forces that disarmed Italy only some six months after their almost total annihilation. Germany was probably less resilient when faced with mounting losses later.

Cheers,

Sid.

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Tue May 08, 2007 10:53 am

Servus Sid,
Thanks for the input. Your point is well taken. I have always been curious as to why some divisions like the 26th Inf were rebuilt again and again and others were just disbanded. Admittedly, the 26th was not catastrophically destroyed like the Stalingrad Divisions but it was bled out to a husk on several occasions. I just found it curious.

Thanks

Regards,

Helmut

derGespenst · Post by **derGespenst** » Tue May 08, 2007 11:58 am

Correct, Sid. ID44 was the Hoch- und Deutschmeister, one of the most renowned units in the KuK army, second only (possibly) to the Kaiserjäger.

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Wed May 09, 2007 4:14 am

Hi Helmut,

With 26 Infantry Division you may be hitting on another prestige area.

This was one of the pre-war active infantry divisions. I have a suspicion that these (1-36, 44-46) would have been rebuilt as a matter of priority as they were the nearest thing to regular formations in the German Army.

Without having checked it, I suspect that pre-war active divisions also tended to be rebuilt quickly as they were prestige losses.

Cheers,

Sid

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Wed May 09, 2007 6:00 am

....even though by the later "rebuilds" they bore no resemblace to their early war selves except in name.

I never thought about the prestige factor. I guess there were a lot of subjective factors that went into these rebuilds.

Thanks for the input.

regards,

Helmut

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Wed May 09, 2007 6:07 am

Helmut

When 26 Inf was rebuilt as 26 Volksgrenadier it was actually on of the few infantry style divs to return to a three regiment @3 bn each org. Also had assault guns on hand and while qualitatively it would be hard to compare with its '39 equivelent it was still top of the line for late '44.

With 44 ID its 134th Regt was based upon 4th Hoch und Deutchmeister Regt which traces its linage well before the Napoleonic War (in which it played a constant role). Traces IIRC to a Crusader type background and a Catholic defender sort of thing.

44 ID made good on its rep being renamed (in its second version) to 44 Reichsgrenadier. Two names in one div!

You have to love the Heer - no other army had as much organizational diversity and managed to remain functional.

cheers
reb

Jan-Hendrik · Post by **Jan-Hendrik** » Wed May 09, 2007 6:59 am

26 Volksgrenadier it was actually on of the few infantry style divs to return to a three regiment @3 bn each org

Where did you got this from?

It was biuld out of 582.ID which was in the raising process and the remants of 26.ID. Neither FüsRgt. 39, GR 77 nor GR 78 had 3 Btl. per Rgt

I think it was more a question how much "core" personal of a division survived to decide which was to be rebiuld abd carry on the elder tradtion...

Jan-Hendrik