The Battle of Normandy 1944 by Robin Neillands

Author:Robin Neillands
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Cassell

11 GOODWOOD JULY 18–21

We were now on the threshold of great events.

We were ready to break out of the bridgehead.

GENERAL B.L. MONTGOMERY Normandy to the Baltic

The Goodwood battle took place at the crux of the entire Normandy campaign, caused a great deal of controversy, at the time and since, and requires some careful dissection if the various elements are to be fully understood. The first two points are that Operation Goodwood was linked with Operation Cobra, the US breakout at St-Lô, and was part of the strategic policy Montgomery had been following since shortly after D-Day – the British to hold the eastern flank and pull the German armour on to that front, while the Americans built up their forces and broke out in the west.

Since this strategy has frequently been misunderstood, misinterpreted or overlooked, it has to be pointed out – yet again – that this had always been the plan. Other than arguments about where the eventual ‘hinge’ for the swing east might be, no one at the time disputed it and in mid-July the bulk of the German armour were indeed facing the British around Caen. By the third week of July, as related in the previous chapter, there were eight German divisions facing the fifteen divisions of the US First Army between St-Lô and the west coast of the Cotentin; Panzer Lehr, 2 SS Panzer and six infantry divisions. Facing the British, on the shorter front from Caumont to Caen, were seven strong Panzer divisions; 1 SS Panzer, 2nd Panzer, 10 SS Panzer, 9 SS Panzer, 12 SS Panzer, 21 Panzer and 116 Panzer, plus five infantry divisions, a total of twelve divisions, over half of them armoured and most of the armour SS. More than 600 German tanks faced the British and Canadians; fewer than 200 tanks faced the Americans.

This being so, it is rather surprising that it is still claimed that Montgomery intended to break out in the east, or is smeared by continuing odium for not breaking out, or for being ‘cautious’ and ‘too slow’. If the strategic plan was to work, the people being ‘too slow’ in July were the American units in the west who had fewer enemy to contend with. The German armour was in the east, the US forces had completed their build-up in the west where the breakout was to take place – and in the end did take place – so what was the reason for delay?

This is not chauvinism. The US Official History makes the same point. Writing on the advance to St-Lô1 it sums up the result as follows:

Heroic exertion seemed, on the surface, to have accomplished little. With twelve divisions, the First Army in seventeen days had advanced only seven miles in the region west of the Vire and little more than half that distance east of the river. Not only was the distance gained disappointing, the newly established Lessay–Caumont line was less than satisfactory. The VIII Corps physically occupied neither Lessay nor Périers;

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.