• Get Paid to Write for Comando Supremo: We are looking for talented researchers/writers who are fluent in English and can write original content on Italy in World War Two. Please reach out to webmaster@comandosupremo.com if interested!

June 1940, north Africa division paper ToE and actual ToE

FrancoFB

Member
The data on the GAF artillery, by Montanari text is divergent from the Allegato 6 (this is from same book by Montanari) data
the Allegato 6 give this data on the Army artillery pieces in Libya at 10th June:
type/ pieces to unit/pieces to depots/total
76/40 AA-12-0-12
76/45 AA-8-0-8
75/27 C.K. AA-24-3-27
20mm AA-206-3-209
47/32-206-3-209
65/17-124-22-146
75/27 1906-154-61-215
75/27 1911-48-0-48
75/27 model not available-228-8-236
77/28-177-159-336
100/17-156-16-172
105/28-82-15-97
120/25-12-36-48
149/12-8-29-37
149/35-60-30-90
210/8-2-1-3

Montanari in the text (exactly in the notes)
note 41 (1st chapter, 1st volume) on the GAF artillery on the west border
9 75/27 btry (four only three pieces)
27 77/28 btry (twenty four only three pieces)
2 105/28 btry
4 120/25 btry (two only three pieces)
7 149/12 btry
5 149/35 btry
1 210/8 btry (only 2 pieces)

total 55 batteries

note 54 on the GAF artillery on the east border
16 77/28 btry
1 105/28 btry
7 120/25 btry
1 149/12 btry
English Questions and Answers For D...
English Questions and Answers For Daily Conversation - Part 58
4 149/35 btry

total 29 batteries, in this note not give the pieces in the battery, in the text, pg 47, is reported 31 batteries.

As we can see, the largest discrepancy, the Allegato 6 report
twelve 120/25 to unit and in the text is reported there were fourteen in the west plus at least fourteen (counting the battery on only two pieces) in the east
seven 149/12 to unit and in the text is reported twenty eight in the west plus at least two in the battery in the east
 
Franco....
Unless the divisional story (Curcio Rubertini in SME acts) is not a sensational false the times of mobilization of the division were those .... the fact that you can compare the two corps (22.o 23.o) it seems to me equally unlikely also given that the 23rd at that time did not have any CA unit in charge but on the other hand that the famous and now ultra famous "attachment 4" (which then others is just a copy of the widely used official stories by Montanari sometimes with absurd blunders) is in some way wrong is now in my opinion established fact even only in the light of the following attachment 5 which reports that reinforcements of the Royal Army arrived in a ridiculous period of time not only never departed from Italy but from difficult transport even for a fleet of the "overlord" type let alone for the Regia Marina 1940 ... most likely the attachment was compiled with data dating back to April-May 1940 or without counting the "absent force" which at the time was the mponenete given the Italian neutrality ... (they are naturally suppositions) but something is certainly wrong in the attachment ....
All the best
Maurizio
 

FrancoFB

Member
Maurizio
I've already suspected that the report of Allegato 4 is from older data, for me, we can assume this.

i've edited the older post consequentely

Dili
I don't think that worked so in the RE


P.S. i just see i've already did a similar thread around one and half year ago, i'm sorry i've forget that, if a moderator want join the two thread... i'm again sorry
 
Last edited:

Dili

Member
It is the Allegato 5 that is wrong. Never Italian Navy transported 67000 soldiers in 10 days just before war start, that kind of operation would be in the books of the navy and the army.
 

FrancoFB

Member
It is the Allegato 5 that is wrong. Never Italian Navy transported 67000 soldiers in 10 days just before war start, that kind of operation would be in the books of the navy and the army.
sure but was wrong also the date, 1st June of Allegato 4 situation,
 

Dili

Member
It say that arrived the lavoratori troops in 24 May. What is missing from say mid May to 1 June?
 
Dili
It cannot be that attachment 5 is incomplete or incorrect because the total number of men present on 10 June matches those transported to the AS at that time ..... therefore attachment 4 o is prior to 1st June 1940 or does not take into account the so-called "absent force" which at the time was represented also and above all by the local conscription of the colonists which was in large numbers ......
All the best
maurizio
 

FrancoFB

Member
Just on this, this night i remembered
in the Montanari' book "L'esercito italiano alla vigilia..."pg 479, Allegato 29 (6th May '40 meeting with Badoglio, Terruzzi, Soddu, Graziani, Cavagnari Pricolo), Terruzzi (was Minister for italian Africa) told "Bisogna tener presente che la forza attualmente in Libia è di 170.000 uomini che dovrebbero essere 230.000, perché circa 60.000 sono in licenza illimitata"
but Badoglio replied "Per questo ho detto che partiamo dalla forza esistente, e cioè da 130.000 uomini che, con gli altri 80.000 da inviare, fanno 210.000...."

later Badoglio "... Delle quattro divisioni CC.NN. se ne potrebbero formare tre e una quarta divisione potrebbe essere costituita col comando della quarta divisione, col reggimento artiglieria divisionale e con due reggimenti dell'Esercito, che dovrebbero essere inviati dall'Italia. L'aumento di forza che si avrà con l'invio di questi due reggimenti, è compreso negli 80.000 necessari per portare sul piede di guerra le unità?
Soddu reply "No, non è compreso"
Graziani reply "Allora è inteso che rimangano tre divisioni CC.NN."
Terruzzi reply "Noi rimpatrieremo una parte della quarta divisione, quella non idonea, e la massa restante servirà per rafforzare le altre divisioni."

later Cavagnari "Vorrei chiarire alcuni punti, per quanto riguarda i trasporti, affinché la Marina possa orientarsi. E' già stato scritto allo SME, proponendo che il materiale sia spedito in anticipo. Per i fututri trasporti vorrei sapere se esssi saranno eseguito con lo stesso metodo seguito finora, cioèalla spicciolata, o se, invece, dovranno essere eseguiti dei convogli."
Soddu reply "Col sistema usato finora."
Badoglio reply "Conviene mandarli alla spicciolata"
Cavagnari again "L'invio in convoglio può destare allarme"
 

Dili

Member
Dili
It cannot be that attachment 5 is incomplete or incorrect because the total number of men present on 10 June matches those transported to the AS at that time ..... therefore attachment 4 o is prior to 1st June 1940 or does not take into account the so-called "absent force" which at the time was represented also and above all by the local conscription of the colonists which was in large numbers ......
All the best
maurizio
The attachment 5 is incorrect because it implies that 67000 soldiers arrived between 1 and 10 June. In that i am certain it is incorrect.

So there were 221530 men of RE in 10 June 1940? so not including Navy, GdF, PAI, CC.RR., MVSN? where is the data corroborating it besides Allegato 5.
 
Obvious also because the statistics of the navy in this regard of June 1940 show 1368 men in all transported during the entire month .... you do ....
All the best
Maurizio
 
No you are wrong .. those arrivals are related to the whole of June 1940 ... see Tav 52a vol1 Military Navy Historical Office year 1950 - Statistical Data
All the best
Maurizio
 

FrancoFB

Member
IMG_0637.JPG
 
don't know what book you have but in the edition I told you there is no note in brackets .... obviously there is no uniqueness ..... however the basic fact is that the attachment 4 is not reliable ....
all the best
Maurizio
 

Dili

Member
I disagree, the only evidence is that the Allegato 5 is unreliable.

Where is the evidence that 221000 RE men were in Africa in 1940 10 June?
 
In a document lying at the EMS of Rome dating back to November 20, 1940 we read ... Italian presence in SA officers 11085, NCOs 12930, troops (nationals) 191065, troops (Libyans) 33349 for a total of 237,344 men. To these we deduct the personnel transported to Libya in November 1591 soldiers, in October 1918 soldiers, in September 4246 soldiers, in August 6407 soldiers and in June 1308 and we get a total of 221.874...
All the best
Maurizio
 
Top