The Dunera’s Journey
Part 2

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 1

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 2

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 3

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 4

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 5

The Dunera’s Journey
Part 6

The HMT Dunera leaves Liverpool on July 10, 1940. The destination of the ship, which was completely overloaded with around 2,500 internees and prisoners of war as well as around 300 guards and the crew members, is Australia. On July 12, 1940, the unaccompanied ship, which is not marked as a prisoner transport but visibly armed, is attacked by the German submarine U-56. The two torpedoes do not explode. The prisoners held on board behind barbed wire are deeply frightened; panic ensues. 451 of them had narrowly survived the sinking of the internment ship Arandora Star by U-47 only a few days earlier, on July 2, 1940.
The historical facts were researched for this article in order to get to the bottom of a legend surrounding the torpedoing of the Dunera. The novel by an anonymous author, which – like other war literature from the Federal Republic of Germany – only claims historical authenticity, plays an important role in this.

Peter Dehn, February 2024

The sinking of the Arandora Star – a “success” in the war at sea

The Arandora Star was the second of four British deportation ships bound for Canada. The sinking on July 2, 1940 was initially of little interest to the Nazi naval command (Seekriegsleitung, Skl), although it immediately became known from listening to enemy radio stations such as the BBC that many Germans were among the 800 victims. Nevertheless, the Skl War Diary[1] CF. War Diary of the Naval War Command (Skl) 1940, page 57. notes: “U 47 reports 10 steamers sunk with ‘Arandora Star‘. This increases the boat’s tonnage success to 66,600 GRT.” Captain Lieutenant Günther Prien, celebrated by the Nazis as a naval hero, could not have clearly reported the ship’s name. According to witnesses[2] Jochen Brennecke, Interview with Hans-Werner Kraus, Brennecke estate in the Federal Archives, N 852/32., the crew only became confirmed of this after returning to Kiel.

The fate of the internees seemed to the German Admiralty around the head of the U-boats, Karl Dönitz (later convicted as a war criminal and Hitler’s successor in Nuremberg), at best a reflection[3] Skl war diary 1940, page 99. on “whether it would be expedient to exploit the incident for propaganda purposes”. For the Nazis, only the German sailors and prisoners of war were considered German anyway, but not the citizens of the war partner Italy and certainly not the more than 160 Jewish refugees and opponents of National Socialism on board the Arandora Star, who were known by name. They had previously been arbitrarily and improperly classified as “enemy aliens” (category “A”) or suspects (category “B”) by questionable tribunals. This defamed them as potential traitors[4] See, among others, Rainer Radok "Survival", Bangkok 1992, and other eyewitness accounts. and they were interned.

Launched in 1927, the Arandora Star was a luxury-class cruise ship for just 354 passengers. The sinking by U-47 claimed 800 victims.

The attack on HMT Dunera

The HMT Dunera[5] HMT = Hired Military Transporter., authorized to transport 1,157 military personnel[6] Vgl. Wikipedia über die HMT Dunera, abgerufen am 25.7.2023., set sail from Liverpool to Australia on July 10, 1940. On board were more than 2,000 Jews and political refugees as well as around 451 survivors of the Arandora Star. Among the 251 Germans and Austrians in the latter group were not only interned sailors (e.g. from the Adolf Woermann and the blockade runner Uhenfels) and businessmen, among them is certainly a number of Nazis, but also around 40 men, known as Jews and Nazi opponents.

Like the Arandora Star and contrary to international agreements, the Dunera is not marked as a prisoner transport or with Red Cross signs, but carries visible machine guns. During this trip she is not protected by a convoy. The prescribed drills for maritime emergencies have never taken place. “All things sonidered no one would care two boots about us”, notes Rainer Radok[7] Peter and Leni Gilllman „‘Collar the Lot!‘ How Britain Interned And Expelled its Wartime Refugees“, London 1980, page 213., one of the Arandora Star’s surviving Jews.

The Dunera’s journey from Liverpool did not initially head south, because “it was the peak of the U-boats’ ‘Happy Time’, and the south-western approaches were  virtually closed”. The captain tried to evade the German U-boats by heading north first. At 8 a.m. on July 12, she reached a point 20 miles west of the island of Barra[8] Ibid. in the south of the Outer Hebrides.

There, Dunera finds herself directly in front of the periscope of U-56. The German naval warfare command (Skl) naturally knows that the northern exit from the Irish Sea is part of the North America route, which is mandatory for sea transports of all kinds.

On the morning of July 12, shortly after 10 a.m., the Dunera’s engines suddenly fall silent. The Jewish internee Klaus Wilczynski[9] Klaus Wilczynski, „Das Gefangenenschiff“, Berlin 2001, page 71. reports:

“A violent bang, like metal hitting metal, startles me. The ship’s hull roared. Cups and plates fall clattering from the shelves on the starboard side. Something sinister and powerful has hit the ship’s side. (…) Then it bangs again. More muffled than the first time, more distant, somehow still threatening. It sounds as if the keel has hit a heavy object.”

Panic then breaks out, Wilczynski continues his report:

“Driven by fear, a tangle of people taken out of their senses pushes upwards, onto the upper deck, into the light. Seasickness is forgotten, just get out of here. Nothing works on the stairs.”

Now the guards fixed bayonets and pushed the prisoners away from the lifeboats and back towards their quarters. Obviously the soldiers have no orders for such a situation, writes a crew member[10] Semaphore (pseudonym), "I came to Australia with 3000 Germans" in "Sydney Sunday Telegraph" 6 and 13 October 1940, excerpts from the diary of a seaman on the Dunera. Quoted from Paul R. Bartrop, Gabrielle Eisen "The Dunera Affair", Melbourne 1990, page 193 ff. (“Semaphore”) of the Dunera in his diary.

There is no doubt that the lifeboats intended for 384 passengers plus crew would not have been sufficient for the 1,167 military personnel allowed on board, let alone for all of the almost 3,000 prisoners, guards and sailors on the voyage. They all escape with a scare, because the torpedoes do not explode and hardly damage the ship.

A new realization[11] Wilczynski loc. cit., page 72. soon took hold among the internees. “It can’t have been that bad. No need to go crazy …” The Dunera picks up speed again, the cannon remains manned – against the frightened internees. A destroyer briefly accompanies the Dunera. It escorts a child transport, but turns off in the direction of Canada. “Both were soon out of sight,” confirms “Semaphore[12] Semaphore loc.cit, page 196; Wilczynski loc.cit,, pages 73/74.“.

Firing report and naval war command in contradiction

In his firing report[13] Firing report of  U-56 from 12.7.1940, Historisches Marinearchiv, retrieved June 25, 2023., the commander of the submarine, Otto Harms, explained the failure with a maneuver by the Dunera: after the torpedoes were fired, the target had “turned about 4 dec. to starboard, therefore 2 misses forward”. The U-56 then had to go deeper ata once, so that “periscope observation was no longer possible”. In the war diary of the U-56, Harms notes[14] War diary of Kapitän Harms U-56 Entry of July 12, 1940, 9.40 am. Bundesarchiv RM 198/44. one miss and “after 8m 13sec and 8m 33sec 2 detonations. The sound of the detonations is somewhat brighter than torpedo detonations observed elsewhere, like airplane bombs. Both detonations are accompanied by an audible crackling sound.” Harms confirms that the Dunera is intact: “Steamer propeller well audible abeam on starboard, destroyer runs towards boat at high speed, but then apparently turns off again and disappears.” U-56 then dives onto “T-30”.

It is not until July 16, 1940 that the German naval command records[15] War diary of Skl, pages 172, 184. the Dunera incident under “U-boat situation … U 56 reports several misses or failures on convoys off the North Channel. Boat intends to enter Lorient[16] A Nazi naval base on the French west coast, south of Brest. on July 19.” Harms and his superiors are contradicting themselves here:

U-56 on its way out.

Harms and his superiors are contradicting themselves here:

• That U-56 would have attacked “convoys” on July 12, 1940 does not correspond to the facts.
• The fact that the Dunera turned away, causing a torpedo to miss, contradicts the witnesses on board, all of whom reported two torpedo contacts on the ship’s hull without an explosion.
• Harms notes that the Dunera’s propeller was still clearly audible. He therefore knows that he did not hit it seriously.

57 days to Australia – without any assistance from the Nazi navy

The Dunera immediately continues its journey west of Ireland to the south. U-56, on the other hand, remains in the area near the northern tip of Ireland before returning[17] War diary of Skl loc.cit, page 197. to its base in Lorient. In his own war diary, Harms noted[18] War diary of U-56 loc.cit.. Entry from July 16, 1940, 4.00 pm. on July 16, 1940 at 4 p.m.: “Started march to Lorient”. For this reason alone, the claim that U-56 accompanied the Dunera on part of the journey south (or even to Australia) must be rejected. The arrival of U-56 at the Lorient base is postponed by two days from the planned date of July 19, 1940. Harms notes on July 21, 1940[19] U-56/Harms ibid, entry from July 21, 1940, 9.43 am. at 9:43 a.m. “Moored in port.” Skl confirms[20] Skl war diary loc.cit., page 246.: “In Lorient: arriving after successful operation: U 52 (…), U 99 (…) and U 56.”

Another consideration speaks against an alleged escort by U-56: The Dunera reached its first stopover in the port of Freetown, Sierra Leone[21] Cf. logbook of the Dunera, July 1940., on July 24. U-56 would therefore have had to end a theoretical escort before July 21 or earlier near Lorient. The sea route from there to Freetown is around 2,800 nautic miles[22] Cf. Bednblue,  sailing distance calculator, retrieved July 8, 2023. The Dunera would have needed at least 7 days at full speed to cover this distance at her maximum speed of 16.13 knots (about 30 km/h). It is absolutely impossible that the overloaded prisoner ship could have covered this distance in the three days between July 21 and 24. This is substantiated by the fact that the Dunera sailed a zigzag course for fear of torpedoes, which considerably extended the travel time.

It is also known that the internees were driven below deck after the crew and officers on watch realized that the attack had failed and the situation on deck calms down. The portholes on the lower decks are closed with metal flaps. The internees housed there are therefore unable to observe what is happening at sea themselves and can only speculate about it.

No legend: “torpedo crisis“ and “wooden gun“

At this point, another historical circumstance should be pointed out that has hardly been taken into account in previous studies (as far as we know). The two misses on the Dunera must also be seen against a military-technical background.

Harms had G7e torpedoes[23] Cf. firing report loc.cit. (serial numbers 3421 and 3185) fired at the Dunera. Shortly afterwards, something similar happened[24] War diary U-56 loc.cit. entry from July 14, 1940, 00.04 am. to him: shortly after midnight on July 14, 1940, he had a G7a torpedo fired at a “large passenger steamer”. “After 12m 01sec very strong detonation. Harking noises from steamer disappear.” After surfacing, however, Harms notes at 0.42 h “no observation made”. With clear despair he writes: “The running time of the torpedo was much too long. On the other hand, it seems unlikely that all torpedoes on U 56 of all ships would go off at the end of the run, although this error is supposed to have been corrected.”

In fact, the error mentioned by Harms has not been rectified. Already during the first enemy voyages in September 1939, a large number of G7a and G7e torpedoes detonated in front of the target or at the end of their range, or hit the target’s hull without detonating. This became known as the “torpedo crisis[25] Wikipedia about the torpedo crisis (German), retrieved July 10, 2023.“: in 1939, 31 out of 181 torpedoes and in 1940, 155 out of 898 torpedoes fired did not work, according to the magazine “Militärgeschichte”. The failure rate[26] Heinrich Schütz „Die Torpedo-Krise im Zweiten Weltkrieg“. In „Militärgeschichte“ No. 1/2009, page 12f. Editors: Militärgeschichtliches Bundesamt (Federal Military History Office) of the Bundeswehr. was therefore 17.0 percent in both years. In 1941, a Court Martial[27] Schütz loc.cit, page 14. found considerable deficiencies in the testing, test evaluations and troubleshooting of the two torpedo types.

In October 1939, the then commander of the U-56, Lieutenant-Commander Wilhelm Zahn[28] Schütz loc.cit., page 14, had already missed a unique opportunity to sink the British battleship HMS Nelson. He had three torpedoes fired. “But there was no detonation. All you could hear on board the submarine was the metallic impact of the torpedoes on the steel hull.” His successor Harms also reported “several misses, no sinking success” from the voyage of U-56[29] Skl war diary loc.cit, page 313. following the Dunera miss.

A torpedo of the G7e type used against the Dunera is shown in the centre. Photo: Alexander Buschorn, War and Resistance Fighters Museum of the Netherlands (Overloon).

In 1939 and 1940, the submarines of the Nazi navy had a firing error rate of 17 per cent. Source: “Military History” No. 1/2009.

Even the Nazi icon Prien considers himself affected by a similar incident. He had told naval chief Dönitz that he should not be expected to “fight with a wooden rifle[30] Michael Thomae: „The submarine weapon during 'Unternehmen Weserübung‘ 1940“ , Militärgeschichte loc.cit. 1/2009, page 14.” again.

Of facts and circulated untruths

It is understandable that the internees on the Dunera were facilitated after the initial shock. It is equally understandable that the internees came up with ideas as to how this good fortune could have happened. Some speak of divine intervention. Politically persecuted people speculated about sabotage by resistance fighters in the torpedo factories, but this is clearly presented in the sources as a hope rather than a fact.

Errors of any provenance are favored because memories are often deceptive when details are reflected with a long time lag. For example, some Dunera boys date the torpedo attack[31] Richard Sonnenfeldt "Wirtness to Nuremberg", Arcade Publishing, New York 2011, page 144. to the second day of the voyage, others to the third, or are mistaken about the location. “On the third evening out, in the storm-tossed Bay of Biscay, we heard a loud clang… ” This seems to be one of the tricks that memory often plays, simply because of the distances to be covered from Liverpool and the demonstrably wrong time of day. It can also happen because one can’t see anything yourself because you’re not allowed on deck and the portholes are covered. You can deal with such errors with understanding. However, it becomes critical as soon as it comes to deliberate untruths that are elevated to facts through colportage.

Loading a torpedo onto a submarine in Wilhelmshaven, probably in December 1939 Source: Federal Archives No. 101II-MW-5536-01

It is not only the US historian Daniel R. Schwartz[32] Daniel R. Schwartz „A submarine, some suitcases, and Salvation: On increasingly inaccessible testimony and the perfection of the Dunera miracle story“ in Australian Jewish Historical Society Journal 24, 4(2020), pages 722-773. who notes that the novel “SOS: Rettet unsere Seelen[33] „SOS: Rettet unsere Seelen“ (SOS: Save Our Souls) by S. Ch. Clerque, Erich Arndt Editors, Hagen/Westfalia 1953.” by S. Ch. Clerque is a major source of the legend of the German submarine that accompanied the Dunera to protect the captured compatriots on board from the torpedoes of other German submarines.

Clerque denies any resemblance between his characters and real people. However – and this is crucial here – he claims[34] Clerque loc.cit., page 6. to have “retold his story based on the notes of a German interned in England during the last world war”. In this way, authenticity is foisted on the 319 pages – without claiming that the informant was an eyewitness to the events surrounding the Dunera. In contrast to the self-statement, however, the book proves to be a hoax of the worst kind.

Submerged and fished up

Clerque prefaces his version of the torpedo attack with another (actually literary) unnecessary historical hoax. In chapter 33[35] Clerque loc.cit., page 281. he writes: “Without incident, the Dunera reaches the height of Nigeria …”. This is where the author places the torpedo attack.

The fact is that the attack on the Dunera takes place on the second day of the voyage and near the western exit of the North Channel, i.e. in the sea area around the northern tip of Northern Ireland. Why is the time and place of the attack shifted to Africa? Does Clerque want to imply German naval supremacy off the west coast of Africa? Does he want to increase the fame of the Nazi navy subsequently?

The torpedo legend is born

In chapter 35[36] Clerque loc.cit., pages 297f., after surfacing, Clerque has the submarine captain shocked to discover that the Dunera, which was thought to be sunk, is sailing! And he sees strange objects floating around, which are identified as suitcases. “Objects are still flying off the ship, almost all of the same size.” Now Clerque has one of the officers agitate his commander: “We can’t just stand by and watch, if it’s true that the barge is an internment ship”. A rubber dinghy is launched in the evening, suitcases are recovered, broken open and surprisingly dry letters in German are found.

The fact is that shortly after the attack, a British destroyer[37] Cf. Wilczynski loc.cit, page 73/74, and Semaphore quoted by Bartrop/Eisen loc.cit, pages 195/196. unexpectedly appeared on the scene as an escort for a children’s transport and accompanied the Dunera for a short time on a short stretch of their journey together. So U-56 seeks the distance for good reason and dives off[38] War diary of U-56, loc.cit, entry from July 12, 1940, 9.40 am..

The book’s captain goes on to speculate: “There was a panic on board (the Dunera, pd) – perhaps a scuffle between the crew and the internees, who wanted to save themselves. The crew wanted to take revenge on the justifiably outraged Germans, kept them locked up and now threw their luggage overboard in a blind rage. Perhaps they did even worse, who knows[39] Clerque loc.cit., page 301. …” What else would we expect from the “Indians with flickering eyes[40] Clerque loc.cit., page 297. As far as is known, Indians were part of the crew of the HMT Dunera, but not of the guards. in their dark faces”, from which Clerque invents the composition of the guards in a racist manner?

The fact is that the 309 guards and their seven officers belonged to the Auxiliary Military Pioneer Corps[41] Wikipedia about HMT Dunera, loc.cit. of the British Army.
The fact is that no luggage was thrown overboard in connection with the torpedo attack. There are no witness reports for this. Nor could this have been observed from U-56, as the boat was moving away from the scene under water.
It is also a fact that Clerque contradicts his own claim that the Dunera continued its journey.

Interestingly, the literary hero captain doesn’t think about his misses for a second. Instead, he declares: “We will provide escort against further torpedoes …” There must not be another attack by Germans against Germans. He transmits a radio message[42] Clerque loc.cit., page 302. to other U-boats and prevents another U-boat from attacking.

The fact is that Harms on U-56 could not have easily known what had happened to the Arandora Star a week earlier. Harms was only able to pass on knowledge about the Dunera to a limited extent. The submarines avoided any radio communication with each other, as this meant that their positions could be targeted. In addition, submerged ships could neither transmit nor receive. And why weren’t surface ships of the Nazi navy also warned of attacks on the Dunera?
The fact is that U-56 remained in the sea area north of Ireland and near the North Channel for days, as confirmed by the U-56’s logbook[43] War diary of U-56, ewntry from July 12, 1940, 9.40 am. and the diary of the German naval command[44] War diary of the German naval command, loc.cit.. The Dunera, on the other hand, was not significantly damaged and continued her voyage.
The fact is that the attack took place on the morning of July 2. The fact that U-56 returned to the scene of the attack at night after escaping, surfaced there and found the Dunera there again is pure fantasy on the part of the novelist. As a result, the “real” submarine crew was unable to observe either people jumping off or suitcases floating on the sea.
It is sheer nonsense that suitcases – as Clerque claims – could have remained on the surface of the water for hours after the attack, against all currents and common sense. That objects inside – especially papers – should have remained dry also contradicts all experience.

An absent “hero of the seas”

“Only under the protection of the German ship U 81[45] The boat number U 81 chosen by Clerque is, like everything else, pure fantasy. The "real" U 81 was only put into service on 26 April 1941. See Wikipedia, retrieved on 2.9.2023. does the Englishman reach the open waters without danger”, Clerque concludes his ode to the chivalry of German sailors[46] Clerque loc.cit., pages 301/302.. By the way: On September 17, 1942, the head of the U-boat fleet Karl Dönitz (1889 – 1980), later Hitler’s successor and convicted as a war criminal, forbade the U-boat crews to rescue members of sunken ships[47] Cf. Wikipedia about Dönitz, and his „Laconia-Befehl“, retrieved Sep 10, 2023. or to give them food or water. “Rescue contradicts the most primitive demands of warfare.”

In this context, a contradictory assessment by Jochen Brennecke (1913 – 1997) stands out. In his “Chronicle of the Submarine War”, the chronicler of the Nazi navy[48] Jochen Brennecke, „Jäger, Gejagte. Deutsche U-Boote 1939-1945“ (Hunters, Hunted, German Submarines 1939-1945) , Koehlers Verlagsgesellschaft, Herford 1956. 8. edition, Hamburg 2000, page 80. since the Nazi era writes about the situation in 1940: “The war at sea has become total” He calls “open waters” completely into question. It is interesting to note that he prefers Goebbels’[49] Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels only gave his speech on "Total War" on Feb 18, 1943. “total war” in ideological obedience from 1943 to 1940.

Following the depiction of the episode, Clerque changes the scene. “If our suitcases serve to ensure the safety of us all, we will gladly do without them” an internee is now allowed to thank the flickering-eyed Indian guards to the applause of his comrades. What chivalrous do-gooders[50] Clerque loc.cit., page 305., these Germans!

While Clerque builds up the Dunera attackers as upright soldiers and honorable heroes, he takes a completely different approach in the case of the Arandora Star. He limits himself to the remark: “It really hit – a torpedo hit[51] Clerque loc.cit., page 129..” The fact that Lieutenant Captain Günther Prien, who was inflated by the Nazis into a naval hero, was responsible for shooting down the Arandora Star is concealed from the reader of this “authentic” book about the “tragedy[52] Clerque loc.cit., page 6.” of this ship. Clerque spares the conflict and does not even invent a “literary” submarine. Under no circumstances should the “SOS” book in 1953 tarnish the National Socialist glory of Lieutenant-Commander Prien and his U-47!

Nazi lies, manufactured 1953

But if it were only about (non-)events, the book could perhaps be dismissed as “bad”. But it’s not just about this part of the novel. Clerque bends basic historical facts[53] Clerque loc.cit., page 7. in an intolerable way. On the very first page, he writes: “England issues an ultimatum … and then declares war on Germany”. This implies that the British started the Second World War.

The fact is that Hitler’s Reich started the world war on September 1, 1939 with the “Gleiwitz” propaganda lie[54] Hitler used an alleged Polish attack on the Gleiwitz transmitter as the reason for the start of the Second World War, but it was carried out by SS in Polish uniforms in order to provoke a reason for war. and the invasion of Poland. The British ultimatum was the reaction to this. Hitler used an alleged Polish attack on the Gleiwitz transmitter as the reason for the start of the Second World War, but it was carried out by SS in Polish uniforms in order to provoke a reason for war.

By deliberately omitting this misrepresentation of historical circumstances, Clerque justifies the war and follows the ideology of Nazi propaganda.

There are only two known publications by an author named Clerque. Sybille and Ch. S. Clerque are probably pseudonyms. Sources: Repro.

Another example is the false figures with which Clerque tries to inflate the importance of “his” German group. He claims that the 3,000 prisoners on board the Dunera included “a thousand German emigrants[55] Clerque loc.cit., page 267.“. Clerque is implying that the other 2,000 men were survivors of the Arandora Star and decent people – at least not people who had previously abandoned their German homeland as emigrants.

https://dunera.de/arandora-star-part-2/?lang=enThe fact is that there were around 2,500 internees on board the Dunera, more than 2,000 of whom were persecuted by the Nazis as Jews or opponents of Hitler and had to leave Germany or Austria. There were also 451 survivors of the Arandora Star on board, including 200 Italians and 251 Germans[56] Cf. „Nominal Roll“ of HMT Dunera, National Archives of Australia (NAA), ID 657104, retrieved Aug 30, 2023. Many numbers of the 251 German survivors from the Arandora Star are labelled with an additional "R" for "Ringleader"..
The fact is: There is evidence of at least 38 Jews and Nazi opponents in the group of 251 Germans. Most of the other 213 were sailors from the German merchant navy, passengers on their ships and businessmen who were interned in Great Britain or its African colonies.https://dunera.de/en/arandora-star-part-2/?lang=en

Foreign words in the vocabulary and a commanding internee

Clerque’s grossly inaccurate numbers game serves to exalt his main characters, “harmless” German merchants who were unjustly imprisoned by the British, to the mass of Dunera internees in order to emphasize their special significance. Clerque does not say a word about the majority of Nazi victims on the ship. Terms such as “Jew”, “Nazi opponent”, “Italian”, “world war” etc. do not appear at all in the entire book, completely ignoring the facts.

Another remark with which Clerque sets up his central character as a role model shows similar fantasy to emphasize the importance of the character and his clientele: This is Alexander Merten, honorable German merchant captured away by the British. “The next morning, the 3,000 internees of the Dunera elect Alexander Merten as their Kommandant[57] Clerque loc.cit., page 269.” (commander).

The fact is that representatives for the individual decks (“deck leaders”) were elected on the Dunera. There was no representative for all internee groups or even a “commander”. Why should Jews and Nazis have elected joint representatives? As soon as the deckleaders became active towards the guard officers and complained about shortcomings and thefts, for example, they were threatened.
The fact is that the Nazis in Australia among the “camp leaders” (not: “commanders”) by no means represented the interests of all internees. Australian intelligence describes one Dr. Haslinger,[58] Cf. Haslinger files, NAA_ItemNumber428433, page 11., “camp leader” at Tatura 1, as a Nazi who carried out his duties “more as the delegate of the Office Holders of the NSDAP than as an independent camp representative” of all inmates. Among other things, Haslinger issued directives to the party followers to “maintain discipline and protect the German National Socialist spirit inside and outside the camp”. The report states, that „the Party controls the camp leadership completely“.

The military term “Kommandant” used by Clerque also shows that the author is probably not too close to the democratic principles which the community of internees had given itself. He can probably only imagine military command structures. This contradicts his own assertion that all “3000” internees were civilians. Incidentally, the novel’s civilian Merten “commands” the internees from the British internment camp via the Arandora Star and the Dunera to the camp in Tatura, Australia.

Blackout in the Outback

At the end of Chapter 36[59] Clerque loc.cit., page 307., the Clerkean lie continues with the claim that all internees were disembarked in Melbourne.

The fact is that the 450 survivors[60] The Nazi diplomat Kittel was disembarked in Cape Town and brought to a VIP internment location on Isle of Man. of the Arandora Star and (to fill the camp’s capacity) another 100 or so interned Jews and Nazi opponents disembarked in Melbourne and were taken to the Tatura camp. The representatives of the second group – and several from the first – fiercely objected to being at the mercy of the Nazis in a common “compound”.
The fact is that the other 2,000 or so internees only disembarked in Sydney days later and were immediately sent to the Hay camp[61] Cf. „Nominal Roll“ of HMT Dunera, cit.loc..

Clerque’s quoted assertion confirms that he is only interested in “decent” Germans. He wants nothing in common with Jews and Nazi opponents. Behind this, too, is nothing other than brown ideology. The final chapter[62] Clerque loc.cit., page 312., set in the Australian camp of Tatura, shows just how much of a brainchild Clerque allows his “commanding” civilian internee to be. An internee seeks out the hero of the book because “he has heard that Merten is looking for a boy to keep his bungalow in order”. Mr “Commandant” lives in his own “bungalow” and keeps an officer’s boy[63] Clerque loc.cit., page 315.!?

The fact is that under international law, prisoner of war officers are entitled to considerable privileges compared to “common” soldiers or even internees. Depending on rank, this also includes servants.

Consequently, such noble internee behaviour is not known from the internment camps. But perhaps the head Nazis had their errand boys.

Is this “cleaning stain” story an “operational accident” on Clerque’s part, inadvertently suggesting that his heroic troops were not civilian internees after all, but prisoners of war?

The fact is that the 250 Arandora Star survivors were initially classified 1940 as “internees” by the British. With the official end of internment, their status was changed to prisoners of war[64] Cf. digitized personal files, accessable via NAA. on June 22, 1942.

After all, Clerque doesn’t want to do without showing off to show that “his” Germans are the best: The Australian guard officers are too stupid and don’t dare to pass on tragic messages from home. Because they don’t want to do the job themselves, they get “the German commander[65] Clerque loc.cit., page 317. for help”.

The fact is that the internees in the Australian camps were able to establish extensive self-administration. These tasks also included distribution of incoming letters and postcards.

Quite apart from that, the book ends with a blackout in the outback. Will Merten, his “boy” and the other “3000” comrades remain in the Australian camp for all eternity? The end of the war and the poor Germans’ return home are not foreseen in the book. Finally, there is a statement by the hero Merten that Clerque attributes to him shortly after the torpedo attack: He thought nothing of “artificially fomented enmity – because, after all, they had all personally never wanted[66] Clerque loc.cit., page 291. this war!” Here, Clerque is spreading the post-war excuse of the silent majority of Germans: No one wanted the war or shouted “Hurray”, “Heil Hitler” or anything similar with an outstretched right arm. Nobody had anything common with the Nazis or knew anything about their crimes . And if they did, it was of course under duress and not at all enthusiastically. So no German can be charged with guilt or responsibility for the crimes of the Nazi era. And the war was fought in an extremely decent and honorable manner. After all, the wehrmacht and navy had nothing to do with Hitler, as well!.

Genre change: penny dreadfuls, their ideology and authors

The attempt to uncover the identity of the writer S. Ch. Clerque leads to research into West German World War II literature of the 1950s. First of all, remarks about the penny dreadful series seem to make sense. As the name suggests, these were inexpensive reading material published weekly or fortnightly from the 1950s onwards and sold in newspaper and tobacco shops. This was followed by an occasionally lively second hand business. The cheap romance novels spread a highly conservative image of women’s roles. The military trilogy literature consistently assumes a “clean” role for the Wehrmacht and navy, justifying and whitewashing the world war. Heroic images are combined with adventurously formulated stories of alleged experiences in order to feign authenticity. The term “Landserheft” became synonymous with all trivial literature glorifying war[67] Cf. Wikipedia on ideology-critical aspects of "Der Landser" (German), retrieved June 25, 2023. Historian Ernst Antoni also describes the “Landser” as a “gateway drug[68] Cf. Ernst Antoni in Dirk Wilking "Der Landser" - Wie ein Mann ein Mann wird (How a Man Becomes a Man) , page. 61. Quoted from Wikipedia on "Der Landser" loc.cit. to the neo-Nazi scene”.

This also applies to the “Landser” spin-off “SOS – Schicksale deutscher Schiffe”, published by Pabel-Verlag (later Pabel-Moewig Verlag) with 200 episodes and several special editions from 1975 to 1981. Its main authors and editors, Fritz-Otto Busch and Otto Mielke, made their mark during the Third Reich by glorifying National Socialist naval warfare. One of the prolific writers (42 titles under the pseudonym Jens Janssen) is Jochen Brennecke[69] Wikipedia on Jochen Brennecke (German), retrieved June 25, 2023. (1913 – 1997), who has already been mentioned briefly. He worked as a war correspondent for the navy between 1940 and 1943 and wrote a book about the Graf Spee, which sank itself in 1939, in 1942. His post-war work “Jäger – Gejagte – Deutsche U-Boote 1939-1945” casts no shadow on the Nazi submariners. He completely ignores the Arandora Star and Dunera incidents. For his summary of the U-boat weapon’s performance, he refers to Karl Dönitz, of all people, who was sentenced to ten years in prison as a war criminal in Nuremberg. The naval chief and Führer’s successor throws himself into the fray: “German naval warfare stands flawlessly before history[70] Brennecke loc.cit., page 454. Brennecke quotes without the required reference to 6 October 1946, as he generally refrains from citing any sources..”

“SOS: Rettet unsere Seelen” is in line with the ideological trend of trivial war literature and the lack of reappraisal of National Socialism in the Federal Republic of Germany. Historical foundations are falsified. Clichés and ideological concepts from the war-glorifying military penny dreadfuls migrate from the penny dreadful to the hardcover, as does racism. Clerque’s book is part of a restorative trend that writes away the Nazis and whitewashes the role of the military and the war, thus ideologically promoting the Cold War against the East in the 1950s and 1960s.

The author – deliberately obscured?

The Clerque book, published in 1953, is – as far as can be researched today – the only book published by Erich Arndt Verlag Hagen[71] Founded as Nordwestdeutsche Presse- u. Buchvertrieb GmbH, later Erich Arndt Verlag, Hagen; then moved to Karlsruhe. Most recently: Angelika Arndt Verlag, Feucht.. No subsequent editions are known. This publisher only published penny dreadful series such as “Der blaue Roman”, “Kronen-Roman”, “Inspektor K greift ein” or “Lilien-Roman: Der Roman für frohe Stunden”. “Sybille Clerque” can only be traced as an author once more: Volume 6 of the series “Sabrina – der moderne Roman[72] Cf. among others Romanheftarchiv (Germnan), retrieved June 25, 2023.” , published in 1959, is signed with the name. This series was published from 1959 to 1961 by Moewig-Verlag, edited by Erich Arndt, the publisher of the “SOS” book.

Prien: A “hero” in the post-war war movie

The penny dreadful series “Soldatengeschichten und Fliegergeschichten” was also published fortnightly by Moewig from 1957 to 1964. Wikipedia notes: “Like ‘Der Landser’, the ‘Soldatengeschichten’ were indirectly a continuation of older German magazine novel series such as ‘Unter deutscher Flagge’ or the ‘Kriegsbücherei der deutschen Jugend[73] Cf. Wikipedia on "Soldiers' stories from around the world" and subsequent titles, retrieved on Oct 15, 2023.‘” (Under German flag or War library for German youth). The term “older” is used here in a shamefaced attempt to conceal the fact that this is Nazi propaganda literature.

In issue no. 171 “U47”, an Udo Wolter spreads the word about Günther Prien. The name Udo Wolter is also mentioned in the opening credits[74] Cf. Wikipedia on the movie „U 47 Kapitänleutnant Prien“ (German), retrieved Oct 25, 2023. of the film “U 47 Kapitänleutnant Prien” as the supplier of the material for the screenplay. The music was composed by Norbert Schulze, who had made a name for himself during the Nazi era with “Lili Marleen”, military music and the score for the endurance film “Kolberg”.

Long after the end of the war, Günter Prien was still being built up as a naval hero in West Germany.

Like Clerque’s “SOS …”, this film also insinuates in the very first sentence and in Goebbels mode that Great Britain started the world war on September 3, 1939. In the film, Prien says that a soldier should stay out of politics. A dialog excerpt from an original Goebbels speech on the radio is telling: “That’s Goebbels speaking.” – “Oh, I like listening to him.” Wolter & Co even build Prien up as an opponent of the Nazis finally; the Gestapo had him in mind, because he would have helped (albeit late) an opposition pastor. To make matters worse, the film concludes with the historical lie that Prien was rescued by British sailors after the sinking of the U 47. However, he was killed by a German submarine attack on his rescuers.

The Catholic film critics[75] Cf. „Lexikon des internationalen Films“, Volume and 8, page 3917. at the time: “Fashionable and insincere cinematic mixture of Teutonic naval heroism, put-on resistance attitude and sentimental anti-war allure.” Incidentally, the production company Arca film also produced a compilation of Nazi newsreels entitled “So war der deutsche Landser”: the “Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle der deutschen Filmwirtschaft[76] The FSK (Voluntary self-regulation of the German film industry) was founded in 1949 to establish an industry body "for the protection of minors" instead of a film censorship by government that was banned in the Federal Republic of Germany.” (FSK) had it cut because of “militaristic, nationalistic and National Socialist tendencies”.

Pseudonym for concealment

Penny dreadfuls were often given author pseudonyms. For example, love stories were given French or Italian-sounding names to enhance their value, and occasionally writers were passed off as “female authors”. For some authors, the penny dreadful fee may have been more important than becoming famous through this trivial literature and thus damaging the fame they had acquired elsewhere as “serious authors”.

The US historian Daniel R. Schwartz speculatively extends the author’s name as Sybille Charlotte Clerque[77] Daniel R. Schwartz loc.cit., page 722-773.. In fact, there are no further sources for any variant of this name. Even in the catalog of the German National Library[78] Cf. catalogue of DNB, retrieved June 30, 2023. (DNB), where deposit copies of every printed publication and of visual and audio works have had to be mandatory[79] DNB on mandatory copies, retrieved Sep 10, 2023. delivered since 1913, only the two titles mentioned are listed.

This gives the impression that the author’s name Sybille Charlotte Clerque could come from a pool of pseudonyms used by the Arndt publishing house. However, it is clear that the authorship of “SOS: Rettet unsere Seelen” can very probably be located in the author scene of “Landser”, “SOS” etc., among whom there was no woman[80] Wikipedia avout „SOS – Schicksale deutscher Schiffe“ loc.cit. Schwartz also established this after examining Arndt documents[81] Schwartz loc.cit. page 752, refers to a letter from Arndt to the leading Social Democrat politician Erich Ollenhauer..

A non-fiction book on the submarine war without any source

This proximity is obvious. For example, Brennecke manages 500 pages of his aforementioned nonfictional book on the Nazi submarine weapon without citing a single source for his many quotations and data. Nevertheless, the text on the back cover claims that the book is of “significant documentary value due to its original reports”. This corresponds to the diction of the penny dreadfuls.

Brennecke also cultivates a pseudo-literary novel-like writing style to describe the “tragically heroic deployment[82] Brennecke loc.cit, page 5. of the submarine crews”, which amounts to a “harrowing sacrifice without precedent”. Brennecke, as “Jens Janssen”, demonstrated in his penny dreadfuls how to disguise the lack of authenticity with brisk writing.

Clerque’s “SOS. Save our souls” and Brennecke’s “Jäger, Gejagte. Deutsche U-Boote 1939-1945” and the Kriegs-Groschenhefte show a high degree of similarity. This applies to the writing style, which is oriented towards adventure literature, and the systematic pretence of historical authenticity to the point of gross historical falsification, the separation of the topics described from the context of the world war started by the Nazis, a subliminal racism and the trivialization of the war, the whitewashing of German soldiering, etc. Nevertheless, the identity of Clerque and Brennecke (or other like-minded people) cannot be proven.

Faulty sources and “Chinese whispers”

After reading a number of memoirs by Dunera boys, Daniel Schwartz assumes that Clerque’s fake collection has been updated according to the principle of the children’s game “Chinese whispers”. As an example, he quotes Dunera boy Bertold Irving Meier[83] Quoted from Benzion Patkin "The Dunera Internees", Stanmore NSW 1979, page 43f.: “S.C. Clerque, the commander of the German submarine that fired the torpedoes at the Dunera, published a book entitled SOS: Rettat Unserer Seelen (‘SOS: Save Our Souls’)” (errors taken from the original). Schwartz refers to Meier’s colportage of Clerque’s claims, including the nocturnal surfacing, people jumping overboard, etc. etc.

It was not only the Australian non-fiction author Benzion Patkin who took over a lot of Clerque’s false information from Meier. It seems that even contemporary witnesses have filled in the gaps in their memories from this source. Unfortunately, the unchecked adoption of the Clerque story continues into the 21st century. For example, Erika von Wietersheim quotes passages in her book, which was published in 2017, about her father Kurt Falk, explicitly citing the Clerque volume[84] Erika von Wietersheim "Nur 24 Zeilen" (Only 24 lines), Hamburg 2017, page 97f. as a source.

God’s hand over the Dunera?

It is particularly bad when Jewish circles also adopt the Clerque hoax without checking it. The fake story was sometimes expanded, spread online in the age of the internet and linked back and forth by copyists in order to claim conclusiveness. An unfortunate example of this is the recently published or repeated story by David Rosenthal, who refers, among other things, to the war diary of the U-56, which he cannot, however, have read. The article published under the heading “The Miracle of the Dunera” culminates in the following sentence about the internees: “The trauma of having their belongings tossed overboard saved their lives.” He thus makes Clerque’s lies[85] David Rosenthal on LinkedIn: "The Miracle of the Dunera" from April 26, 2020, retrieved Sep 24, 2023; cf. Clerque loc.cit., page 305. his own.

At the end of the article, Rosenthal refers to an article previously published in a Jewish US newspaper by Ira Bauman[86] Ira Baumann "The Dunera Boys", published on May 5, 2016 in Jewish Link, retrieved on Sep 25, 2023., from which Rosenthal obviously “borrowed” parts of his article on the submarine legend verbatim, without naming Bauman as the source. The relevant passage ends with the sentence: “As the story became public, the survivors of the attack realized that the hand of Hashem helped them that day. The vile lot that comprised the crew took their ire out on the poor refugees by tossing overboard much of their belongings. However, if not for that act, 2000 Jewish lives would have been lost.” This and the subheading “The Hand of Hashem” even lend a religious dimension to an event, which never happened.

Dunera Boy Hans Marcus commented on the Clerque torpedo legend[87] Hans Marcus, „The U-Boat Commander and the Dunera“ in „Dunera News“ No. 12, May/June 1987, page 14. as early as 1987: “It seems none of the people who have heard of this book have ever seen it”, he alludes to the book and the colportages that emerged from it. He refers, among other things, to the information provided to him by the German navy historian Jürgen Rohwer and confirmed in the U-56’s ship’s log, according to which the appearance of a destroyer[88] War diary of U-56 loc.cit., entry from July 12.  1940, 09.40 am. in the immediate vicinity of the Dunera would have prompted Captain Otto Harms to give the order for U-56 to dive in order to disappear from the now threatening scene – instead of sticking to Clerque and accompanying the Dunera anywhere in order to protect her from his own comrades.

To summarize: The book “SOS: Rettet unsere Seelen” by “S. Ch. Clerque” is a penny dreadful disguised as a hardcover, which propagates nationalist and National Socialist ideology and racism, falsifies historical facts, whitewashes questionable soldiering in a militaristic manner, and trivializes wars and National Socialism.

Footnotes