Sunny Italy?

This is coldbert:

Thanks here in part to Al Nofi, [CIC # 175], StrategyPage.

Somethings - - in warfare - - NEVER change??!!

This quite often has been a topic of previous blog entries I have made!

NOW, consider this:

From the wiki entry on the Dulcinian Movement.

"The winter of 1305 was particularly cold and the pressure from the Catholic troops and the inhabitants of the valley was particularly effective so Margaret of Trento [Margharita di Trank] decided to lead another march through the mountains to escape the siege."

The year - - 1305 - - the place - - the mountains of Italy - - the conditions - - COLD!

"During the Anglo-Russian Campaign in Naples [southern part of Italy] over the winter of 1805-1806, several Russian soldiers froze to death, the weather in the mountains of “Sunny Italy” being more ferocious than that back home." [CIC # 175]

The year[s] - - 1805-1806 - - the place - - the mountains of Italy - - the conditions - - COLD!

And, further, from my blog entry:

"The largest land battle in Europe [western], Cassino was the bitterest and bloodiest of the Western Allies' struggles with the German Wehrmacht on any front of the Second World War."

"On the German side, many compared it unfavourably with Stalingrad."

"The German commander, Lieutenant-General Fridolin von Senger und Etterlin, wrote: 'We found that divisions arriving from other theatres of war were not immediately equal to the double burden of icy mountain terrain and massed bombardment.'"

During the Italian campaign [1944], German soldiers, who had been in both places [Stalingrad and the Appenine mountains] compared them unfavorably.

The year - - 1944 - - the place - - the mountains of Italy - - the conditions - - COLD!

"Sunny Italy"??

coldbert.

Dulcinians!

This is coolbert:

Here is an occurrence of guerrilla warfare only mentioned in passing by the myth man, Joseph Campbell, in his book, "The Masks of GOD: Occidental Mythology".

Described as:

"one of the most amazing episodes of desperate guerrilla warfare in the history of Europe."

Apparently, an anti-clerical, anti-feudal, anti-authority movement having a strong religious basis to it.

This was "The Dulcinian religious movement" [circa 1300 A.D.].

Originally a peaceful movement, descending into violence and destructiveness as a reaction to persecution, primarily from papal authority.

According to Campbell, "yielding many members to the stake".

A peaceful movement that became very violent. A GROUP OF TRUE BELIEVERS! I AM RIGHT - - YOU ARE WRONG- - GET OUT OF MY WAY - - OR ELSE!!!

"Dolcino justified everything committed by the Dulcinians in this period by affirming that they were so perfect they could do anything they wanted without Sin, basing his affirmation on Saint Paul (Epistle to Titus 1,15): To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure; their very minds and consciences are corrupted."

[Dolcino of course was "pure", as was his paramour [in spirit hopefully, Dolcino being a monk], Margherita di Trank.]

"paramour - - c.1300, noun - - "passionately, with strong love or desire," Originally a term for Christ (by women) or the Virgin Mary (by men)"

A Crusade was actually launched against these "heretics", a Crusade only succeeding after great difficulty, due to the rough terrain of the Italian Piedmont and the fanaticism of the "guerrillas".

The fate of the leaders of this fanatical movement was grim. According to Campbell:

"Segarelli [founding member of the Dulcinians] himself was burned in the Great Papal Jubilee 1300 . . . the leaders of the largest company of his followers - - Dolcino . . . Catteneo, and Margherita di Trank . . . were captured and executed: the woman . . . was roasted slowly before Dolcino's eyes, and he himself was driven about the city of Vercelli in a cart, being gradually torn to bits with battery of red-hot pincers, while his colleague, Cattaneo, was suffering the same piecemeal dismemberment"

"he was tortured with hot instruments, evirated, his fingers, his nose, his ears were amputated, his tongue and his eyes extirpated and when they reached Vercelli he was finally burned at the stake."

"Evirate - - to castrate; To emasculate; to dispossess of manhood."

"ex·tir·pate - - 2. to pull up by or as if by the roots; root up"

[someone must have really had it in for Dolcino.]

Such was the ways things were handled in those days.

coolbert.

Unique?

This is coolbert: From an informant of mine currently living in Italy - - comments to "Rampage on Cassino" and the actions of the goum.

[thanks here to Buti]

Curzio Malaparte followed the Allied troops from Naples and reported how Italian women in Naples valued black Americans more than whites and were not reluctant to bring them home as "fiancès". Malaparte further chronicles an incident with the Moroccans (goumiers) in the French army before the Allied troops marched on Rome:

"When news of the goumiers' arrival spread throught the district, all the peasants fled, crossing themselves...and a number of monks immediately hurried forward from the neighbouring monasteries to convert the goumiers ...they had orders to baptize all the Moroccans because the Pope did not want Turks in Rome. The Holy Father had in fact sent a radio message to the Allied Command in which he expressed his desire that the Moroccan Division should be halted at the gates of the Eternal City".

[the term Turk is used to describe in a generic manner any Muslim, regardless of nationality. The goums of course were not Turks, but Morroccans.]

It was not black American troops, but Muslims in the French Army that he feared. The reason "why the Pope didn't want Turks in Rome" was that "there were three thousand women refugees in the papal villa". "It has devolved upon me, said General Guillaume (the French general), to throw a cordon of sentries round the outer walls of the papal villa so as to prevent the goumiers from going in to pay their addresses to the Pope's wives".

[it seems the goum not only committed rape, pillage, and murder on the slopes of Cassino, but intended to do the same on the grounds of the Vatican?? Seek out the refugee women and have a repitition of what previously transpired? As for converting the goum and baptizing them, well, forget it!!]

Curzio Malaparte was a person perhaps uniquely suited to report events as they occurred. Was first in the 1920's an ardent fascist, then ran afoul of the Mussolini regime, later rehabilitated by Count Ciano himself [the son-in-law of the Duce'], ended up his life as a communist!!??

[Malaparte was certainly a man of varied political beliefs. Did not see the democratic, Christian, capitalist institutions of the western world as AS HAVING answers for the problems of the common man? Saw either fascism or communism as viable alternatives.]

Wrote extensively as a journalist and author. Authored several books during the war years. Again, was perhaps uniquely qualified in the manner with which he reported the war.

"From November 1943 to March 1946 he was attached to the American High Command in Italy as an Italian Liaison Officer."

"Malaparte extends the great fresco of European society he began in 'Kaputt'. There the scene was Eastern Europe, here it is Italy during the years from 1943 to 1945; instead of Germans, the invaders are the American armed forces. In all the literature that derives from the Second World War, there is no other book [this is 'The Skin'] that so brilliantly or so woundingly present triumphant American innocence against the background of the European experience of destruction and moral collapse."

Again, thank you Buti!

coolbert.

Reason?

This is coolbert:

"Manco il fortuno, Non il valore." - - "We were short on luck, Not on bravery"

Came across this by accident.

An article that deals with Italian military ineptness in World War One [WW1] and World War Two [WW2].

Devoted readers will recognize that this is a subject I have touched upon before.

So has another writer. This one a professional military man.

"THE ITALIAN MILITARY ENIGMA

Eric G. Hansen - - Major, USMC.

Quotes extensively from the writings of Erwin Rommel. Concerning the breakdown of Italian forces at Caporetto. Another recent blog entry of mine has also touched on this same subject!

From the article:

"why is it that Italy, among all those countries which have been relatively unsuccessful militarily, been singled out as being particularly inept?"

"Even those who know very little about military
history can readily produce a joke dealing with some aspect of
Italian military inability.

There is common reference, for
example, to Italian tanks which have one forward and three
reverse gears, or to used Italian military rifles for sale which
have been dropped only once'. Ethnic jokes are, of course,
common [ly], are not told maliciously, and many are admittedly funny,
but this particular negative association between Italians and
military capability nevertheless raises interesting questions."

Dupuy suggests that ONE reason among many as to why the German soldier did so well in WW2 was because of "national characteristics".

It is said of the Italian:

"by himself in a dark back-alley knife fight the Italian is a rough customer. Put that same Italian in a uniform with a rifle at war and he will cower in a basement for the duration!!"

It is said of the German:

"a German will not even run a yellow traffic light. Put that same German in uniform with a rifle at war and he does the most terrible things!!"

Is any of the above true?? Over stated and malicious stereotyping??

[if anything, the Marine Major is too kind to the Italians. Does not even mention Taranto or Mattapan. Italian ineptness was across the board!! Sure were unlucky a whole lot of times!]

coolbert.

Cassino.

This is coolbert:

Read further here about the Monte Cassino battle.

Amazing stuff. I knew that it was a hard and difficult slog. But what I am reading here suggests something way beyond what I thought.

These excerpts are most indicative:

"The battle took four months, and by one estimate it left a quarter of a million dead or wounded."

"'Only the bloodbaths of Verdun and Passchendaele, or the very worst of the Second World War fighting on the Eastern Front, can compare to Monte Cassino,' writes the author of a recent book on the battle, Matthew Parker."

[this is saying A LOT!!!

"The largest land battle in Europe, Cassino was the bitterest and bloodiest of the Western Allies' struggles with the German Wehrmacht on any front of the Second World War."

"On the German side, many compared it unfavourably with Stalingrad."

"The German commander, Lieutenant-General Fridolin von Senger und Etterlin, wrote: 'We found that divisions arriving from other theatres of war were not immediately equal to the double burden of icy mountain terrain and massed bombardment.'"

[remember the Germans were on the defensive here. Defense is the easier form of combat. And yet, even the defenders had a very hard time. What must the allied forces, on the offensive, had to put up with??!!]

"General Alexander sought unsuccessfully to have the death penalty reinstated for desertion as the battle wore on."

[Alexander commanded the British 8th Army after Montgomery had gone on to higher duties. To reinstate the death penalty for desertion must have meant that a lot of guys were deserting and shirking duty!!]

Mountainous terrain, matched combatants, cold weather, no room for maneuver, inept operational planning [??]. The allied forces were faced with an impossible situation they just had to deal with as best they could. WHO said war was easy??!!

[look at the photo accompanying this blog. That is the abbey after the bombardment. And then occupied by the Hermann Goering Division. Best unit in the German Army. First you have to make it up the mountain. Then assault dug-in determined and skilled enemy fighters. Want to give it a try??!!]

coolbert.

Mountains.

This is coolbert:

From a comment to my blog entry of January 6, 2006:

"True! I'm a vet of the Winter Line and Anzio with the 45th infantry division. Remember [I] publicity-mad Clark with his PR brown noses announcing in November 43 he was going to give Rome to his wife as a Christmas present. Not until June of 44 did we break out of Anzio and take Rome, and then only because of the Normandy landings. And he was under direct orders to bypass Rome, swing east and cut off the German retreat from the Cassino line."

The January 2005 National Geographic contains an article that is germane to this blog entry about Mark Clark and the Italian campaign of World War Two. A hard slog if there ever was one.

The terrain of Italy did lend itself to a successful German defense. Defense, as Clausewitz said, IS the stronger form of combat. Easier to do and achieves more with less. The allied forces were up against a tough enemy with time to prepare, good troops, with good commanders. NOT an easy task.

Historically NOT an easy task. HOW much historically? Well, according to this Geographic article, 2300 years historically to be approximately right.

It seems that the Romans, during their efforts to subjugate the Italian boot, encountered resistance from a whole variety of Italic peoples. To include the Etruscans, Faliscans, the Umbrians, and the Samnites.

It is the latter, the Samnites, who gave the Romans the MOST resistance. A warrior people, the Samnites were also hill-people. Mountain dwellers who used the mountainous Apennine range to their advantage.

"Higher in the Apennines - - Italy's mountainous spine - - the Samnites, Marsians, and other Italic s found security among steep slopes that frustrated roving invaders and Romans unschooled at first, in mountain warfare."

"All the Italic people were skilled at warfare, but the Samnite men were legendary even in their day, guerilla fighters capable of sudden attacks so violent that their enemy had no time to organize an effective resistance"

"'the Samnites taught the Romans a lot about how to fight' . . . the Samnites used a checkerboard formation, which was ideal for mountainous terrain, their weapons were short stabbing swords, spears, and round shields. Some experts surmise that after the first disastrous encounters, the Romans switched from their standard phalanx formation, which was no good on hills and adopted both the checkerboard formation and the weapons."

The Romans were a patient and adaptable people. Studied their campaigns that were not victories and learned from them. Adapted to the mountainous terrain and defeated the Samnites.

Mark Clark did not have the luxury of time as did the ancient Roman commanders.

coolbert.