Grenadiers: The Story of Waffen SS General Kurt "Panzer" Meyer (Stackpole Military History Series)

While unquestionably the most complete history of Kurt Meyer’s war experiences we’ll ever get, one wishes the book had an extra chapter or two. Covering from the Polish invasion on 1 Sep 39 until Meyer’s release from prison on 7 Sep 54, certainly the most critical periods of his life are included but there is a before and after story that would make fascinating reading but such will never be. What we have, though, is certainly worth a look.Weighing in at over 400 pages including a nice index, Grenadiers was written by Meyer immediately after his release from prison. He had an agenda for writing it and it was more than just money. While WW2 veterans of the Wehrmacht were granted pensions, members of the Waffen-SS weren’t and Meyer became the spokesman for the Hilfsgemeinschaft auf Gegenseitigkeit der Angehörigen der ehemaligen Waffen-SS (HIAG), an organization of former W-SS members whose goal was to rehabilitate the reputation of the Waffen-SS. "Grenadiers" was part of that effort. Readers of this book will take away that the Waffen-SS fought at the front lines just like other soldiers and that although they were part of the SS, they were soldiers, nothing more or less – unless possibly being elite – and had nothing to do with concentration camps or with other atrocities. If events didn’t fit into this purpose, they weren’t in the book.Grenadiers start with the invasion of Poland and it’s a “You are there!” type of story. Either Meyer is a gifted writer or there is an uncredited ghost writer because the book is vividly written, totally engaging, and with a style most writers would only hope to emulate. And as far as “been there, done that”, it would be tough to find anyone who was at the front lines (or sometimes beyond them) than Meyer – Poland, Netherlands, France, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, 18 months/125 pages in Russia, and then to France and Normandy/Falaise. Perhaps he had access to combat diaries, maybe he had a phenomenal memory, or perhaps things are just burned into your brain when people are shooting at you but his level of detail is nothing short of amazing. Specific crossroads, who went what direction when, what his thoughts were as he assessed a particular situation, and specifics of casualties are just some of the details one can expect time and time again. I have no particular reason to doubt the accuracy of his story; it just surprised me that it could be so vivid that much later in his life but then, that he survived at all is quite amazing given that he lost 7 drivers during the war. The following is not in the book but from a Canadian document from one of his post-war Canadian interrogators and echoes my sentiments concerning his combat memory, “On military matters, his mind was crystal clear, and once having oriented himself on the map he was able to go through the campaign phase by phase giving strengths, boundaries, tasks, with consummate ease.” Given that he kept receiving higher levels of command, his perspective on the battles changed over time. He started as a tank destroyer unit commander in the Polish invasion while at Normandy, he assumed command of the 12th SS-Panzer Division on the death of its commander. The reader sees the different perspectives of command as he moves up the totem pole. In all cases it’s illuminating and engrossing. One sees the tone of the book change after the Stalingrad loss with the strictly offensive phase ending and defensive operations becoming the order of the day. After one last victory in Russia, he’s off to Normandy. His descriptions of the battles there, the utter chaos that naval artillery and tac air caused, give the feeling of utter hopelessness yet the effectiveness of his unit is corroborated by the Official History of the Canadian Army in the Second World War which is available on-line. He covers more than just his actions; he provides his impressions of opposing forces throughout the book. In the Normandy phase, he is unrelentingly critical of Canadian commanders not using their initiative to overwhelm his forces though there could be an element of sour grapes here as it was the Canadians who conducted his war trial and sentenced him. He’s also very critical of German command not conducting counterattacks before the beachhead was firmly established though his criticism is leveled at the Wehrmacht and OKW, not at either Waffen-SS commanders or Hitler. Regardless, this section is riveting reading and certainly presents a picture that Normandy and Falaise were certainly places where death came quickly on the German side. And then he was captured.Kurt's view of his trial is of someone who was wrongly accused, then wrongly convicted. He denies ever giving orders to take no prisoners but undermines his own story a bit by earlier, in Normandy, several times mentioning finding Canadian orders that said the same thing. Why bring up something like this if nothing bad happened on his watch? Personally, I found it odd that soldiers would walk around with orders or notes that said, “Take no prisoners”, as that flies in the face of “Survival, 101.” We’re presented his view of the proceedings and no official documents are included. He definitely viewed the proceedings as a kangaroo court with his guilt pre-ordained. If his descriptions are somewhat accurate, the evidence certainly wouldn’t have stood up in a US court of law. Using his descriptions, one of the key items against him was a document signed by a deserter and murderer of a German officer. As he states, “The ‘proof’ was a photo copy of an English translation based on the Flemish transcription of a German-Czech oral statement.” The witness was “not available” and could not be found for the trial so only this document was introduced as evidence. Other evidence is discussed and one gets Meyer’s views on it. So is the reader left in the lurch as to whether he committed the Canadian atrocities? I’d say, “No”, at least from a current legal standpoint for these particular incidents; unlike, say, Anton Dostler, he didn't directly order any executions and it's unclear how much he knew or could know concerning what troops under him were doing this hectic period unless he happened to be right there in person to witness it. In his own words, “Humans, not angels, fought on both sides.” His position appears to be, “I did nothing worse than the other side.” This doesn't mean that he didn't know a lot of non-Geneva Convention activities didn't take place on his side of the battle. In the Normandy section, he spends pages describing Canadian excesses against SS troops which, if true, would certainly constitute war crimes. Why document these if only the Canadians committed crimes? Then there are some additional statements he makes. Twice in Russia he brings up Soviet atrocities. On the first occasion, he mentions coming across murdered German soldiers outside Rowno and includes a picture. He states it as a fact, how his troops looked at him, and then we’re on to the next battle with no further discussion. Later he discusses coming across tortured and maimed German soldiers. Again, it’s discussed and then on to the next battle. After reading this book, you begin to understand Meyer a bit and it really strains credulity that he would take this sitting down. If one does some web research, there are certainly indicators he didn’t as he had more than a couple of atrocities laid at his feet, the first occurring as early as Oct ‘39 in Poland. Considering he had just been released from prison and the war wasn’t that long in the past, it’s certainly understandable he wouldn’t want to document any reprisals. It wouldn’t fit into his attempt to rehabilitate the reputation of the W-SS plus it might invite some prison time. The point is one needs to read between the lines a bit.Sprinkled throughout the book are interesting Meyer perspectives which seem odd today but obviously not to him. After the invasion of Poland he indicates, “… we heard that the Allies had rudely rejected Adolf Hitler’s peace offer at the beginning of October.” That he would think they might accept peace after just invading and taking over a friendly ally shows his viewpoint is far different from those in the West. Later, in Normandy, he mentions how the allies “absurdly” wish unconditional surrender. Again, he appears to be living in an alternate universe. And then we get to the items that aren’t in the book but one wishes were. Nothing is said about Meyer prior to Poland. Thus we lose out in understanding how Meyer became the extraordinary combat leader he was. Was it some sort of Waffen-SS training or did he just have it built into his DNA? Was the combat fanaticism of his soldiers because they were Nazis or because of their training? Again, no insights. Outside reading indicates Meyer himself joined the Nazi party in 1930, the SS in 1931, a date before the Waffen-SS so it certainly can be inferred he was a pretty dedicated Nazi. In the book, there is no direct criticism of Hitler, only some laments such as “the calamity of Stalingrad” but nothing to lay it at Hitler’s feet. The military high command catches the criticism for not counter-attacking before the Normandy beachhead was secured, not Hitler for refusing to release the divisions. There is no criticism of any Waffen-SS unit but certainly the same can’t be said for Heer units. Even his sobriquet, “Panzer” Meyer is left to the imagination and most people, me included until I did some additional reading, assume it was related to his wartime experiences. In fact, he was given this nickname before he even joined the SS when, during a prank at the police academy at Schwerin, he fell off the 2nd story of a building and though he broke 20 bones and was expected to die, recovered completely thus gaining him the title of “tank” for his indestructibility; his wartime nickname was “Der schnelle Meyer”, gained in Operation Barbarossa. The other part that is missing is any of his actions after release from prison. Some of his speeches for the HIAG were barely short of ludicrous in their assertions (“SS troops committed no crimes, except the massacre at Oradour” yet any reading of Oskar Dirlewanger’s war activities would put lie to that claim) but all that is said in the book is a brief comment, “But crimes did happen. It is irrelevant to discuss the number of victims.” Not much of a confession for the thousands of innocents who did die at the hands of the Waffen-SS.In summary, this is a fascinating volume. It lost a star primarily because it doesn’t include the front end story but also because it doesn’t provide insight into his post-war activities. You really understand Meyer only based on his actions but quickly see why he was legendary even among the toughest soldiers. It is a well written volume, contains a handy chart at the end to understand SS rank structure, a very decent index, and is a worthy addition to the WW2 shelf on one’s library. Besides recommending the book, I’d recommend outside reading to fill in some of the details about Meyer that the book glosses over or just doesn’t cover at all. He’s not a complex person but there’s a bit more to him than the book covers.

Like a lot of you reading this, I have read innumerable books about the Second World War, most of them from the German perspective. The majority of these were testaments by former army officers or, in the latter instances, Party-government bigwigs. GRENADIERS was the first work I had ever bought penned by a former SS man, in this case Kurt "Panzer" Meyer. I was very interested to see what an ex-member of two notorious Waffen-SS divisions, the "Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler" and the "Hitlerjugend", would have to say...not merely about his combat experiences but about Hitler, National Socialism, and the war in general.GRENADIERS exists on several levels simultaneously: a pure combat memior by a man who saw a hell of a lot of it, a treatise on the relationship of the Waffen-SS to its putative parent body, the Gestamt or "Total" SS, a spirited defense of the Waffen-SS against the "libels" leveled against it by the victorious Allies and by the postwar German government, and a memior of Meyer's trial for war crimes, his imprisonment (originally a death sentence) and his eventual release. On all these levels it succeeds...so much so that it permenently changed my view of the Waffen-SS. But I'm getting ahead of myself.As a combat memior, the book is highly entertaining. It begins in media res, with Meyer's antitank unit rumbling into Poland in September 1939, and continues at a steady clip through the campaigns in France (1940) the Balkans (1941), Russia (1941 - 1943) and finally Normandy (1944), during which time he served with many legendary Waffen-SS frontfighters, including Fritz Witt, Max Wünsche, Michael Wittmann, Gerd Bremer, Theodor Wisch, and Sepp Dietrich. Meyer, who finished his career as the acting commander of the 12th SS Panzer Division, offers almost no biographical information about himself, and seldom "flashes back" to his peacetime existence. For the most part he is simply recounting tales of battle at the head of an elite recon unit as it was transferred from one hotspot to another all over Europe. Because Meyer's troops were motorized, riding on motorcycles, amphibious wagons, armored cars or assault guns, his accounts tend to be like his style of fighting: straight-ahead, breathless and fast-paced (not for nothing was his original nickname "Schneller" Meyer). He's an exciting narrator, if not a very skilled one, and he manages to convey a lot about his personality and philosophy of war without lecturing the reader. His accounts of the Russian and '44 French campaigns are particularly interesting to students of those theaters; he often speaks of the physical and psychological burdens placed on the German soldier by Russia's brutal climate and vast spaces, and of similar strains imposed in the West by the Allies overwhelming superiority of material. He writes without bitterness, and with a strong sense of respect to his own troops and to their opponents, be they Poles, Russians, Canadians (the French don't compare too well).Meyer makes some very interesting points about the average Waffen-SS man in his outfit. He notes that they were very young (19 years old on average for privates), that 62% of them had been in technical or skilled trades before the war, and that very few of them had actually been members of the Allgemeine (General) SS before the war began. "These young men," he insists. "Fought for Germany and certainly did not die for a political party." Their motivations for joining the Waffen-SS were made from simpler stuff: it had the most attractive uniforms, its exploits were ballyhooed in the German press and it was regarded universally as an elite unit...all powerful motivators to young men looking for glory.Meyer, who was captured in 1944 and tried for war crimes immediately after the war, recounts his trial with some bitterness, and not merely because he was, as were most German POWs of any standing, badly mistreated in captivity. Having taken great pains to show that he fought chivalrously at all times, he regarded the trial as a humiliation and a disgrace, the moreso because most of the evidence against him was based on heresay, perjury and ex post facto jurisprudence. Having his sentence commuted from death to life imprisonment was, in fact, worse than death for him, since he was incarcerated not in a POW camp or even a place like Spandau Prison but in an ordinary Canadian hooscow - with rapists, arsonists and murderers as cellmates. The agonizing struggle to obtain his release, waged in part by the Canadian press (which righteously pointed out that Canada had violated its own laws in convicting Meyer), and his life as a spokesman for HIAG in West Germany (the Waffen-SS veterans' association, dedicated to securing military benefits for Waffen-SS veterans) close out the book on a more or less uplifting note...though the reader may find himself exhausted emotionally by the time the last page is read. Meyer's journey is truly a punishing one.It is a defense of the Waffen-SS, however, that the book is most intriguing. Meyer points out - repeatedly - that the Waffen-SS had relatively little to do with its parent body, and was merely a military organization in a slightly different uniform. The picture painted by history - of a band of murderous racial fanatics, screaming "Sieg Heil!" as they shot prisoners in the neck, is (Meyer insists) nonsense. Doubtless there were men of this type in Waffen-SS units, but as Meyer points out, nearly all of his opponents routinely shot prisoners in cold blood, bombed defenseless towns and used civilians as human shields - including, he adds pointedly, the Western Allies, who have tended throughout history to portray themselves as knights in shining armor.The book isn't perfect. Meyer touches on the murders committed by his men in Normandy only in terms of explaining, after the fact, how he was disgusted by them and ordered an investigation into their commission; he tells the reader nothing about his life before the war or why he ended up in the SS in the first place (he was transferred from a Police unit, the German Police becoming part of the SS in 1936) and his style of writing is amateurish, though not without talent. None of this, however, was a significant detraction from GRENADIERS, which in the final analysis is not so much a memior but a tribute to the 900,000 men who, whatever their motivations or war records, were collectively dubbed "criminals" in 1945...and have spent, along with their families, dealing with the fallout of this sweeping judgement. But as Meyer is quick to point out, the ultimate verdict on a soldier comes from his opponent, and as one Canadian soldier exclaimed: "The SS were a bad bunch of bastards, but were they ever soldiers!"

This book was written by the German General Kurt Meyer, who was nicknamed as "Panzermeyer"I think this book is about mlitary leadership. Kurt Meyer was a outstanding leader and a role model for his men. The book is full of examples about true leadership. Panzermeyer had two basic principles, the first is to set the example in everything and everywhere and the second one is the commitment with his men.Furthermore the author made a detailed account of his experiences as commander from the battalion level to the division level. Panzermeyer was a superb leader, due to the flexibility of his tactics inspired in the manoeuvres warfare . That was the reason because he fought against enemy stronger forces and defeated them.One of the goals that Meyer kept in mind with the book is to defend the reputation of Waffen SS, which were blamed of atrocities and crimes against prisoners of war and civilian populace. We could agree with him or not, but it is very incredible that only Germans committed war crimes.In my opinion, Panzermeyer has a realistic view of war crimes . He said that the war is fought by men not by angels. He also set the principle of the lack of commander's responsibility when the soldiers act against orders or the commander couldn't control them. Moreover he complained about the lack of impartiality of the allied court which ignored the crimes of allied forces against GermansIn conclusion I think this book doesn't apologize the Nazis, It defends only the right of every soldier to be recognized for the society for which he has foughtIt is a worthwhile book to read

One of the best memoirs. Reads like a novel. He has a flair for writing. What comes across is his deep admiration for his men during and after the War. If he hadn't been on the losing side would have been hailed a hero. Sadly born in the wrong country as I'm certain he'd have been a national hero for us if he had been English rather than German. Like many many others from Germany he bet on the wrong horse and who seemed like a saviour ended up their destroyer. Easy in hindsight to point fingers.

Great book interesting

This Stackpole Series always impresses with the wealth of detail and illustrations, and this is yet another example. Good read, excellent history and study of a Commander of the German Forces of WW2.

Can't wait to read it.

I have spent five years looking for this book in English, and I still believe it was worth it. The only bad thing I have to say about the book, is, as the author explains, the fact that it has been changed into American English ( foxhole for trench etc) but that is not very often. This book is a reprint only done this year and it has been done very well. The quality of the book is superb. But more importantly, the content is excellent. The way he describes the hell he and his men had to endure is amazing. And unlike some others, of all sides, he points out constantly that it was his men that won his battles for him, under his direction. Throughout the book there is no attempts to apologise for anything that may have occurred during the war, simply the truth of what he saw and what he believed. The author is not as well celebrated as others in his army, but after reading this book you will wonder why he seems only to be mentioned in passing. Few others including historians, have had the experience combined with the humility of this man, making for a gripping read.