Talk:Battle of the Mareth Line

Supercharge II
I've lost a few edits today on this, due to conflicts - sorry if my frustation shows. So a few comments. Good - no: great - to see an expansion, but the description on the original XXX Corps attack needs expansion. It seems to me that Supercharge II (not Supercharge, which was elsewhere) is subsidiary to Pugilist: if not, then the article should be split or renamed. The chunk about the discovery of "Wilder's Gap", planning and movement into position is a part of Supercharge II (IMO) and should not be confused with the main Pugilist. The NZETC website is critical about the conduct of operations in the Tebaga Gap and these should be added, at least as an opinion - I think it has weight. Folks at 137 19:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry I missed this and put a note on your talk page. Apologiews again since I normally try to keep discussions on the same page. This is what I put on your page:
 * Hi Folks! I think your recent change to the Supercharge heading is wrong. As I understand it the original left hook through the gap by NZ Corps was part of the original Pugilist plan to cut off Italian 1st Army and advance to Sfax. It stalled in the Tebaga Gap on 23/24th March at which point Pugulist ended. Supercharge was the amended plan bringing in 1st Armoured and commenced 26 March. This is all stated in the NZ official history found by following the link in 6. References. Are your sources saying something different? Regards Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 20:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Rename?
Since the article now covers both Pugilist and Supercharge II, perhaps it should be renamed to "Battle of the Mareth Line". -- Hongooi 15:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Possibly. There's a group of articles that cover the same series of events - Operation Capri, Mareth Line and this. I intend to draw them together, perhaps in the Mareth Line article, with redirects, or possibly a new one ("Battle of the Mareth Line" is a possible title). Folks at 137 18:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think this article should be renamed the Battle of Marethline or the Battle of Mareth as above comment mentions that this is about Operation Pugilist & not Supercharge II. Since the Battle of Medenine article was initially Operation Capri and was changed I see no reason why this article shouldn't be. Shire Lord 15:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Brooks
Fn 16 does anyone know which book this relates to? Keith-264 (talk) 15:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Found it.Keith-264 (talk) 15:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

British
Please refer to the RS for usage, it's British for the Eighth Army, even the First Army was British, despite the II US Corps and the Vichy French turncoats.Keith-264 (talk) 10:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Didn't know that Leclerc was a Vichy turncoat. VoltigeurFR(talk) 13:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Ask the Vichy regime, recognised internationally after the Armistice which shot Free French prisoners as traitors. Keith-264 (talk) 14:27, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't answer the fact that you're saying that Leclerc was a Turncoat, which implies he served Vichy at one point, which he did not, besides, do you have any sources that state any numbers on the amount of "Turncoats" that were present in the Leclerc Force VoltigeurFR(talk) 13:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Straw man, he was a rebel against Vichy. I'm bored with this. Keith-264 (talk) 15:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Where's the 'straw man' in this? VoltigeurFR(talk) 18:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Re-wording
"In early January 1943, a LRDG patrol had found a usable pass into the Dahar, which was named Wilder's Gap." I don't understand the significance of this sentence.

Where is 'Dahar'? Who is or more likely was, 'Wilder'? Maybe all is revealed earlier on in the article, but I don't think so - I've read it and can find nothing to satisfy my curiosity.

Maybe a spot of re-wording is in order.

RASAM (talk) 09:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Did you miss Jebel Dahar in the terrain section? Keith-264 (talk) 09:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think my glasses need cleaning, but I still don't understand the Wilder's Gap thingie. Any ideas?


 * RASAM (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Left hook

In early January 1943, a LRDG patrol had found a pass into the Jebel Dahar, which was given the name Wilder's Gap.

I edited this yesterday to make it clearer. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 21:40, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Account of the Battle is not accurate
The account of the battle is not precise – it seems relies heavily on Montgomery's memoirs, who are not accurate and are completely biased when minimising Italians efforts. Iin his memories, usually everytime something goes wrong for him, it’s always because of “Rommel” intervention or for Germans resistance; even at the Mareth line he states that – despite the fact it was Messe who engineered the resistance and directly commanded the counterattack of the German panzers, which were the only panzers left the 1st Italian Army had. Moreover, he seems to ignore – maybe conveniently… - that in fact there were the strongholds held by the Germans that crashed down after the first punch given by the 50 English division: strongholds “biancospino, Bosso e Betulla” held by the Germans were overrun, while the strongholds “larice and trifoglio” held by Italians (X and XI Bersaglieri) resisted the punch. The 21, after assessing that this was effectively the main punch, and after also the stronghold trifoglio was overrun, Messe decided to commit the 15 Panzers as well as ITALIAN infantry (Bersaglieri, GG FF, Black Skirt and some German infantry – but minority in numbers) for a counterattack. Borowietz, commader of the 15 Panzer, was informed of the plan the 21. The counterattack was carried out effectively by Messe. Messe also had plan for a counterattack against Freyberg at El Hamma (moving forces from the Mareth line; as he was sure Montgomery would not have attacked again) before retreating to the second line at Akarit; but Von Armin and Supreme Commander denied him this chance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.252.96.14 (talk) 12:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * See citations for sources.Keith-264 (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

It is not right anyway – official relationship written shortly after the battle, coming from Axis side, states the events as I briefly reported here, whereas on the Wikipedia page the perception is that the only the Germans saved the day, when the Italians already where overrun. Which is not true. Defense at Mareth was well planned by Messe; and the subsequent Axis retreat to the Akarit line was part of the plan (and it was accomplished in good order). Messe wanted to change this plan as he saw there was a possibility to counterattack the Allied also at El Hanna (NB Freyberg did not achieve any surprise there – if you read the nowadays public documents of those days, you will read that the movements of NZ were under Axis observation since the first hours of their march). As Messe was closely informed by these movements, and as the Allied were stopped as planned (Messe did not want them circling the 1st Army, cutting off the planned retreat to Akarit), he changed ideas about the retreat to Akarit – ie he wanted to counterattack at El Hanna, and informed Von Armin and Supreme Command of his intentions, explaining that he wanted to move panzers and 90 German division from the Mareth line, as well as the 21 German Panzer, Italian Artillery units and Italian troops (as he rightly assessed that Montgomery would not risk to give battle again at Mareth line). Gave battle to NZ who were not expecting that, and were on difficult terrain, with bases 200 km away. But Von Armin did not agree on that, and his view was also shared by the Supreme Command, that did not gave consensus. Messe regretted this decision (also after the war he always stated that a good opportunity was lost there) and gave orders to start retreating to Akarit line instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.252.96.14 (talk) 16:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

On note: these planned retreats, aimed at slowing down the Allied advance to Tunis, where not only the “move of the desperation” (well; it turned this way in the end…). They were part of a plan who envisaged to retake an offensive position towards the summer of 1943, when it was thought that the situation in Russia would have been eased (after the last major offensive the Germans were planning), and airplanes, tanks, troops could be assigned to the African theater. Messe, to be honest, knew this was a little bit of a nonsense (as he fought before against the Russian, and he knew how costly the eastern front was, in term of materials); nevertheless he applied to slow down this advance as much as he could (and he succeeded very well - as Montgomery, in the end, was not able to be the first to reach Tunis). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.252.96.14 (talk) 17:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you have sources for this? If so please share them, and we may put them in article, or even draw up a consensus. Shire Lord  (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * NZOHKeith-264 (talk) 22:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok I will try to gather references for this (albeit I think it will be a difficult task, as most of the reference I have are on paper / copies of original documents, etc). Maybe I will write then a short story of the events here – so to share information and making maybe a common assessments for the main page. As a side note: I think there is still a lot of research to be done / things to be written about the WWII – especially related to the events committing Italians (as it seems available documents related to Italy and WWII most of the time are not caught on the scope of historical research). The facts in Tunisia are a good proof of that: (in short) you had the 1st Italian Army in the south, and the 5th German Army in the west – both instructed to fight a series of defensive battles, to keep Allies out of Tunis and Biserta at all cost. While everyone knows about Von Arnim and the Germans, it seems little is known about the fighting related to the 1st Italian army, commanded by Messe. The strong defense of the Mareth line (I would call it a defensive victory, as the plan was to impose a stop to the 8 British Army and retreat then to Akarit), the organized retreat at Akarit line; the subsequent commitment from the 8 British army at Akarit (basically the whole Army was commited by Montgomery, to crash the defensive positions there); the retreat toward the last defensive line at Enfidaville. The definitive stop the 1st Italian army (which was reduced to tatters) was able to impose to the 8 British Army at Enfidaville (as it was the last garrison to defend at all cost). It seems these facts are not known (even if some battle facts, like the battle of Takourna between Italians and British troops, probably accounted as one of the most ferocious battle fought during WWII). The Enfidaville line resisted to the pushing of the 8 Army until the end – ie even after the collapse of the 5 German army on the west: when the Allies occupied Tunis and Biserta (defended by Germans): the line was still there, facing the 8 Army. Ultimately they were encircled by the north, by the Allies coming down. When Montgomery talked to Messe, after he was taken prisoner, he asked “where is the commander, Rommel?”; Messe replied “I am the commander; Rommel left long ago but it was kept secret”. As far as I know, Montgomery never acknowledged this fact – in his memories (which I read), he always maintained he faced Rommel in Tunisia (which is not true). The memories of Alexander are more reliable on these aspects — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.252.96.14 (talk) 09:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Jebel Dahar
An error message ("No value was provided for longitude") is displayed at Battle of the Mareth Line due to the following wikitext which is missing the coordinates.

I guess the coordinates from Jebel Dahar need to be added but I'm hoping someone familiar with the topic will check what needs to be done. Thanks Keith-264! Johnuniq (talk) 22:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I’ve just added some coords, copied from the page of the mountains. No idea why the error only occurred now.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 22:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Possibly something to do with Wikidata – lots of changes to the name, as if pages were moved (but they weren't that I can see), in the last 24 hours. No idea how that would cause a problem, but I can’t see where else it was getting coords before.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 22:51, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't remember if I added that map but I wouldn't have known about adding coords if I copied a template without them.... Regards Keith-264 (talk) 23:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Future pluperfect is not past tense
Just shouting into the wind here __ this crops up a lot in World War 2 articles, possibly because they are translated from Romance languages. It’s pompous academese there, and worse here, except in case where it’s correctly used, ie an operation was planned but did not take place. If it happened please please please use past tense, please and thank youElinruby (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits
If you have any reliable sources that call this an Allied victory, I suggest you list them here. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)