Was the first German bombing of London an accident?Did the Germans invent Radar first?Was Truman told that the first atom bomb was going to be used on a military target?Was this Indian from British India the first to strike Berlin during World War I?Do ~25% of Japanese people believe that USSR dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?Did Soviet soldiers commit two million rapes of German women in 1945?Did Nazi Germany use the German census in its targeting of minoritiesDid Christian soldiers commit the first recorded suicide bombing?Was the UK's drive to acquire civilian metals to use in WW2 necessary for the war effort?Was the German V2 rocket the only weapon whose production killed more than its use?Is the March of the Immortal Regiment a cult of the German Third Reich?

A second course in the representation theory

Is a butterfly one or two animals?

What does it mean to have a subnet mask /32?

How big would a Daddy Longlegs Spider need to be to kill an average Human?

What is the difference between a premise and an assumption in logic?

Why don't we use Cavea-B

Why were movies shot on film shot at 24 frames per second?

How to organize ideas to start writing a novel?

To "hit home" in German

Are illustrations in novels frowned upon?

The economy of trapping

The teacher logged me in as administrator for doing a short task, is the whole system now compromised?

Why would the US President need briefings on UFOs?

Are required indicators necessary for radio buttons?

Sleeping solo in a double sleeping bag

How to persuade recruiters to send me the Job Description?

In an emergency, how do I find and share my position?

Something in the TV

Does adding the 'precise' tag to daggers break anything?

How to "know" if I have a passion?

What is the evidence on the danger of feeding whole blueberries and grapes to infants and toddlers?

Why is Boris Johnson visiting only Paris & Berlin if every member of the EU needs to agree on a withdrawal deal?

Why doesn't the Falcon-9 first stage use three legs to land?

Dark side of an exoplanet - if it was earth-like would its surface light be detectable?



Was the first German bombing of London an accident?


Did the Germans invent Radar first?Was Truman told that the first atom bomb was going to be used on a military target?Was this Indian from British India the first to strike Berlin during World War I?Do ~25% of Japanese people believe that USSR dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?Did Soviet soldiers commit two million rapes of German women in 1945?Did Nazi Germany use the German census in its targeting of minoritiesDid Christian soldiers commit the first recorded suicide bombing?Was the UK's drive to acquire civilian metals to use in WW2 necessary for the war effort?Was the German V2 rocket the only weapon whose production killed more than its use?Is the March of the Immortal Regiment a cult of the German Third Reich?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








12















A 2002 Telegraph article reports:




The first German bombing of London on the night of Aug 24, 1940, was an accident but sparked a war of attrition that would last for five years.



German aircraft heading for a military target flew off course and mistakenly dropped their bombs on central London.



The raid was interpreted by Winston Churchill as deliberate and the following night 40 British bombers were sent on their first attack to the German capital Berlin.




A June 2018 War History Online also makes the claim:




By most accounts the bombing on August 24 was an accident. German bombers, that were supposed to hit military targets outside of London, flew past and struck part of the capital itself, causing some damage and civilian deaths.




I found the claim first in this Quora answer




That changed in September 1940 when London was accidentally bombed by a small number of German bombers who were off course and bombed London by mistake. The British retaliated by spending a small number of bombers to Berlin. After that, the gloves came off and Germany targeted London and other British cities.




These sites to do not list sources.



There's no mention of it in the Wikipedia article on The Blitz, but under the entry for August 24th on page for August 1940 is says:




The Luftwaffe dropped bombs on the financial heart of London and Oxford Street in the West End, probably unintentionally as the German bomber pilots had likely made a navigational error and did not know they were over the city.




The three provided references are: a book I can't access, a dead BBC link and link to a Battle of Britain history website that doesn't mention it under the August 24th entry.










share|improve this question





















  • 1





    I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

    – DevSolar
    Aug 8 at 14:12











  • The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:26












  • The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

    – Oddthinking
    Aug 8 at 15:49






  • 3





    Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

    – fatdoor
    Aug 10 at 7:14


















12















A 2002 Telegraph article reports:




The first German bombing of London on the night of Aug 24, 1940, was an accident but sparked a war of attrition that would last for five years.



German aircraft heading for a military target flew off course and mistakenly dropped their bombs on central London.



The raid was interpreted by Winston Churchill as deliberate and the following night 40 British bombers were sent on their first attack to the German capital Berlin.




A June 2018 War History Online also makes the claim:




By most accounts the bombing on August 24 was an accident. German bombers, that were supposed to hit military targets outside of London, flew past and struck part of the capital itself, causing some damage and civilian deaths.




I found the claim first in this Quora answer




That changed in September 1940 when London was accidentally bombed by a small number of German bombers who were off course and bombed London by mistake. The British retaliated by spending a small number of bombers to Berlin. After that, the gloves came off and Germany targeted London and other British cities.




These sites to do not list sources.



There's no mention of it in the Wikipedia article on The Blitz, but under the entry for August 24th on page for August 1940 is says:




The Luftwaffe dropped bombs on the financial heart of London and Oxford Street in the West End, probably unintentionally as the German bomber pilots had likely made a navigational error and did not know they were over the city.




The three provided references are: a book I can't access, a dead BBC link and link to a Battle of Britain history website that doesn't mention it under the August 24th entry.










share|improve this question





















  • 1





    I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

    – DevSolar
    Aug 8 at 14:12











  • The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:26












  • The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

    – Oddthinking
    Aug 8 at 15:49






  • 3





    Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

    – fatdoor
    Aug 10 at 7:14














12












12








12








A 2002 Telegraph article reports:




The first German bombing of London on the night of Aug 24, 1940, was an accident but sparked a war of attrition that would last for five years.



German aircraft heading for a military target flew off course and mistakenly dropped their bombs on central London.



The raid was interpreted by Winston Churchill as deliberate and the following night 40 British bombers were sent on their first attack to the German capital Berlin.




A June 2018 War History Online also makes the claim:




By most accounts the bombing on August 24 was an accident. German bombers, that were supposed to hit military targets outside of London, flew past and struck part of the capital itself, causing some damage and civilian deaths.




I found the claim first in this Quora answer




That changed in September 1940 when London was accidentally bombed by a small number of German bombers who were off course and bombed London by mistake. The British retaliated by spending a small number of bombers to Berlin. After that, the gloves came off and Germany targeted London and other British cities.




These sites to do not list sources.



There's no mention of it in the Wikipedia article on The Blitz, but under the entry for August 24th on page for August 1940 is says:




The Luftwaffe dropped bombs on the financial heart of London and Oxford Street in the West End, probably unintentionally as the German bomber pilots had likely made a navigational error and did not know they were over the city.




The three provided references are: a book I can't access, a dead BBC link and link to a Battle of Britain history website that doesn't mention it under the August 24th entry.










share|improve this question
















A 2002 Telegraph article reports:




The first German bombing of London on the night of Aug 24, 1940, was an accident but sparked a war of attrition that would last for five years.



German aircraft heading for a military target flew off course and mistakenly dropped their bombs on central London.



The raid was interpreted by Winston Churchill as deliberate and the following night 40 British bombers were sent on their first attack to the German capital Berlin.




A June 2018 War History Online also makes the claim:




By most accounts the bombing on August 24 was an accident. German bombers, that were supposed to hit military targets outside of London, flew past and struck part of the capital itself, causing some damage and civilian deaths.




I found the claim first in this Quora answer




That changed in September 1940 when London was accidentally bombed by a small number of German bombers who were off course and bombed London by mistake. The British retaliated by spending a small number of bombers to Berlin. After that, the gloves came off and Germany targeted London and other British cities.




These sites to do not list sources.



There's no mention of it in the Wikipedia article on The Blitz, but under the entry for August 24th on page for August 1940 is says:




The Luftwaffe dropped bombs on the financial heart of London and Oxford Street in the West End, probably unintentionally as the German bomber pilots had likely made a navigational error and did not know they were over the city.




The three provided references are: a book I can't access, a dead BBC link and link to a Battle of Britain history website that doesn't mention it under the August 24th entry.







war world-war-ii nazi-germany






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Aug 8 at 15:47









Oddthinking

104k33 gold badges435 silver badges539 bronze badges




104k33 gold badges435 silver badges539 bronze badges










asked Aug 8 at 13:38









Przemysław CzechowskiPrzemysław Czechowski

3431 silver badge8 bronze badges




3431 silver badge8 bronze badges










  • 1





    I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

    – DevSolar
    Aug 8 at 14:12











  • The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:26












  • The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

    – Oddthinking
    Aug 8 at 15:49






  • 3





    Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

    – fatdoor
    Aug 10 at 7:14













  • 1





    I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

    – DevSolar
    Aug 8 at 14:12











  • The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:26












  • The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

    – Oddthinking
    Aug 8 at 15:49






  • 3





    Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

    – fatdoor
    Aug 10 at 7:14








1




1





I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

– DevSolar
Aug 8 at 14:12





I've read this claim for the first time in "Und Deutschlands Städte starben nicht" by David Irving. While that person has long since been discredited as a historian, this should at least show that the claim has been around a while (1964, in this case).

– DevSolar
Aug 8 at 14:12













The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

– bukwyrm
Aug 8 at 14:26






The german wikipedia on the Blitz says that "bombs were dropped on london although it was not an official target" leaving open whether that was on accident or not.

– bukwyrm
Aug 8 at 14:26














The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

– Oddthinking
Aug 8 at 15:49





The August 25th entry refers to "The RAF raid was a reprisal for the German bombing of London the previous night. " It doesn't mention it was an accident which is consistent with that not being understood by the British on the day.

– Oddthinking
Aug 8 at 15:49




3




3





Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

– fatdoor
Aug 10 at 7:14






Technically it is a good question, but I have a little problem with the implicit message and the framing. There might be readers who don't know that the German Luftwaffe already bombed away a complete city (Rotterdam) on purpose, and threatened to do it with other cities too. This all happened a few months before the bombing of London. German bombing of Rotterdam

– fatdoor
Aug 10 at 7:14











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















11














Yes, we have a number of reasons for believing the idea that it was an accident, based on Luftwaffe bombing patterns, the raid itself, and Hermann Göring's orders.



The Luftwaffe was not trying to destroy London.



Since the middle of 1940, the Luftwaffe had been trying to destroy the Royal Air Force, in preparating for the planned Operation Sea Lion, to conquer Britain. As such, many of the targets were RAF airfields, as well as industrial facilities:




The campaign launched in the summer of 1940 was designed to prepare the ground for the planned invasion of Britain, Operation Sea Lion, authorized by Hitler on 16 July 1940. This was to be essentially a form of longrange tactical bombing against RAF and military targets to eliminate British air defences and offensive capability.




In Fighter Boys, historian Patrick Bishop writes (page 296)




On 25 August the weight of the attacks shifted to the south and west and attacks were launched on Portland, Weymouth and Warmwell airfield in Dorset. . . On the morning of 26 August the attacks swung back to the 11 Group airfields, with a formation of forty Heinkels and twelve Dorniers making for Biggin Hill.




Bishop's point is that the attack on London was an anomaly. The Luftwaffe continued, for several weeks, to continue bombarding its old targets: airfields and industrial facilities. Moreover, the targets were not near London, merely Group 11 airfields (southeast England and the approach to London).



This was a small-scale bombing raid and poorly concentrated.



To bomb London would have been a massive shift in German strategy, and likely would not have involved merely two bombers. However, the bombs that fell that night fell in two clusters, one of which wasn't even close to London, originating from two different airplanes.



The sustained attack on London didn't begin until September 7th. This was a series of deliberate raids that involved nearly continuous daily/nightly bombing for almost two months. After a switch to nightly raids, the Luftwaffe bombed London for 76 consecutive nights. In short, if the August 24th/25th raid had been intentional, it would have been extremely uncharacteristic of the Luftwaffe's strategy during this time period.



Nothing suggests that Göring ordered it.



We know that, as of the middle of August of 1940, Germany was prepared to possible bomb London and other major British cities, in addition to their industrial and military (essentially, non-civilian) targets. However, going into August 24th/25th (including the raid that included the first bombing of central London), there was no intention to do so just yet. On August 19th, Hermann Göring issued a document stating




There can no longer be any restriction on the choice of targets. To myself I reserve only the right to order attacks on London and Liverpool.




The thing is, we have nothing to suggest that Göring gave that order several days later. Many Luftwaffe documents from the night of August 24th/25th are missing, but any command to bomb London would likely have been well-documented.



Bishop also writes (page 295) that Göring was in fact displeased by the result of the raid, though no German primary sources are specifically cited for those remarks:




The breach of orders was blamed on an error in navigation. Goering, anticipating a storm of rage when Hitler heard the news, demanded to know who was responsible and threatened the guilty with a transfer to the infantry.







share|improve this answer






















  • 1





    Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 14:53












  • Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:59






  • 1





    I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 15:13






  • 1





    @Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

    – Ángel
    Aug 8 at 23:58







  • 1





    @Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

    – Ángel
    Aug 9 at 0:11




















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









11














Yes, we have a number of reasons for believing the idea that it was an accident, based on Luftwaffe bombing patterns, the raid itself, and Hermann Göring's orders.



The Luftwaffe was not trying to destroy London.



Since the middle of 1940, the Luftwaffe had been trying to destroy the Royal Air Force, in preparating for the planned Operation Sea Lion, to conquer Britain. As such, many of the targets were RAF airfields, as well as industrial facilities:




The campaign launched in the summer of 1940 was designed to prepare the ground for the planned invasion of Britain, Operation Sea Lion, authorized by Hitler on 16 July 1940. This was to be essentially a form of longrange tactical bombing against RAF and military targets to eliminate British air defences and offensive capability.




In Fighter Boys, historian Patrick Bishop writes (page 296)




On 25 August the weight of the attacks shifted to the south and west and attacks were launched on Portland, Weymouth and Warmwell airfield in Dorset. . . On the morning of 26 August the attacks swung back to the 11 Group airfields, with a formation of forty Heinkels and twelve Dorniers making for Biggin Hill.




Bishop's point is that the attack on London was an anomaly. The Luftwaffe continued, for several weeks, to continue bombarding its old targets: airfields and industrial facilities. Moreover, the targets were not near London, merely Group 11 airfields (southeast England and the approach to London).



This was a small-scale bombing raid and poorly concentrated.



To bomb London would have been a massive shift in German strategy, and likely would not have involved merely two bombers. However, the bombs that fell that night fell in two clusters, one of which wasn't even close to London, originating from two different airplanes.



The sustained attack on London didn't begin until September 7th. This was a series of deliberate raids that involved nearly continuous daily/nightly bombing for almost two months. After a switch to nightly raids, the Luftwaffe bombed London for 76 consecutive nights. In short, if the August 24th/25th raid had been intentional, it would have been extremely uncharacteristic of the Luftwaffe's strategy during this time period.



Nothing suggests that Göring ordered it.



We know that, as of the middle of August of 1940, Germany was prepared to possible bomb London and other major British cities, in addition to their industrial and military (essentially, non-civilian) targets. However, going into August 24th/25th (including the raid that included the first bombing of central London), there was no intention to do so just yet. On August 19th, Hermann Göring issued a document stating




There can no longer be any restriction on the choice of targets. To myself I reserve only the right to order attacks on London and Liverpool.




The thing is, we have nothing to suggest that Göring gave that order several days later. Many Luftwaffe documents from the night of August 24th/25th are missing, but any command to bomb London would likely have been well-documented.



Bishop also writes (page 295) that Göring was in fact displeased by the result of the raid, though no German primary sources are specifically cited for those remarks:




The breach of orders was blamed on an error in navigation. Goering, anticipating a storm of rage when Hitler heard the news, demanded to know who was responsible and threatened the guilty with a transfer to the infantry.







share|improve this answer






















  • 1





    Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 14:53












  • Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:59






  • 1





    I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 15:13






  • 1





    @Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

    – Ángel
    Aug 8 at 23:58







  • 1





    @Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

    – Ángel
    Aug 9 at 0:11















11














Yes, we have a number of reasons for believing the idea that it was an accident, based on Luftwaffe bombing patterns, the raid itself, and Hermann Göring's orders.



The Luftwaffe was not trying to destroy London.



Since the middle of 1940, the Luftwaffe had been trying to destroy the Royal Air Force, in preparating for the planned Operation Sea Lion, to conquer Britain. As such, many of the targets were RAF airfields, as well as industrial facilities:




The campaign launched in the summer of 1940 was designed to prepare the ground for the planned invasion of Britain, Operation Sea Lion, authorized by Hitler on 16 July 1940. This was to be essentially a form of longrange tactical bombing against RAF and military targets to eliminate British air defences and offensive capability.




In Fighter Boys, historian Patrick Bishop writes (page 296)




On 25 August the weight of the attacks shifted to the south and west and attacks were launched on Portland, Weymouth and Warmwell airfield in Dorset. . . On the morning of 26 August the attacks swung back to the 11 Group airfields, with a formation of forty Heinkels and twelve Dorniers making for Biggin Hill.




Bishop's point is that the attack on London was an anomaly. The Luftwaffe continued, for several weeks, to continue bombarding its old targets: airfields and industrial facilities. Moreover, the targets were not near London, merely Group 11 airfields (southeast England and the approach to London).



This was a small-scale bombing raid and poorly concentrated.



To bomb London would have been a massive shift in German strategy, and likely would not have involved merely two bombers. However, the bombs that fell that night fell in two clusters, one of which wasn't even close to London, originating from two different airplanes.



The sustained attack on London didn't begin until September 7th. This was a series of deliberate raids that involved nearly continuous daily/nightly bombing for almost two months. After a switch to nightly raids, the Luftwaffe bombed London for 76 consecutive nights. In short, if the August 24th/25th raid had been intentional, it would have been extremely uncharacteristic of the Luftwaffe's strategy during this time period.



Nothing suggests that Göring ordered it.



We know that, as of the middle of August of 1940, Germany was prepared to possible bomb London and other major British cities, in addition to their industrial and military (essentially, non-civilian) targets. However, going into August 24th/25th (including the raid that included the first bombing of central London), there was no intention to do so just yet. On August 19th, Hermann Göring issued a document stating




There can no longer be any restriction on the choice of targets. To myself I reserve only the right to order attacks on London and Liverpool.




The thing is, we have nothing to suggest that Göring gave that order several days later. Many Luftwaffe documents from the night of August 24th/25th are missing, but any command to bomb London would likely have been well-documented.



Bishop also writes (page 295) that Göring was in fact displeased by the result of the raid, though no German primary sources are specifically cited for those remarks:




The breach of orders was blamed on an error in navigation. Goering, anticipating a storm of rage when Hitler heard the news, demanded to know who was responsible and threatened the guilty with a transfer to the infantry.







share|improve this answer






















  • 1





    Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 14:53












  • Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:59






  • 1





    I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 15:13






  • 1





    @Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

    – Ángel
    Aug 8 at 23:58







  • 1





    @Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

    – Ángel
    Aug 9 at 0:11













11












11








11







Yes, we have a number of reasons for believing the idea that it was an accident, based on Luftwaffe bombing patterns, the raid itself, and Hermann Göring's orders.



The Luftwaffe was not trying to destroy London.



Since the middle of 1940, the Luftwaffe had been trying to destroy the Royal Air Force, in preparating for the planned Operation Sea Lion, to conquer Britain. As such, many of the targets were RAF airfields, as well as industrial facilities:




The campaign launched in the summer of 1940 was designed to prepare the ground for the planned invasion of Britain, Operation Sea Lion, authorized by Hitler on 16 July 1940. This was to be essentially a form of longrange tactical bombing against RAF and military targets to eliminate British air defences and offensive capability.




In Fighter Boys, historian Patrick Bishop writes (page 296)




On 25 August the weight of the attacks shifted to the south and west and attacks were launched on Portland, Weymouth and Warmwell airfield in Dorset. . . On the morning of 26 August the attacks swung back to the 11 Group airfields, with a formation of forty Heinkels and twelve Dorniers making for Biggin Hill.




Bishop's point is that the attack on London was an anomaly. The Luftwaffe continued, for several weeks, to continue bombarding its old targets: airfields and industrial facilities. Moreover, the targets were not near London, merely Group 11 airfields (southeast England and the approach to London).



This was a small-scale bombing raid and poorly concentrated.



To bomb London would have been a massive shift in German strategy, and likely would not have involved merely two bombers. However, the bombs that fell that night fell in two clusters, one of which wasn't even close to London, originating from two different airplanes.



The sustained attack on London didn't begin until September 7th. This was a series of deliberate raids that involved nearly continuous daily/nightly bombing for almost two months. After a switch to nightly raids, the Luftwaffe bombed London for 76 consecutive nights. In short, if the August 24th/25th raid had been intentional, it would have been extremely uncharacteristic of the Luftwaffe's strategy during this time period.



Nothing suggests that Göring ordered it.



We know that, as of the middle of August of 1940, Germany was prepared to possible bomb London and other major British cities, in addition to their industrial and military (essentially, non-civilian) targets. However, going into August 24th/25th (including the raid that included the first bombing of central London), there was no intention to do so just yet. On August 19th, Hermann Göring issued a document stating




There can no longer be any restriction on the choice of targets. To myself I reserve only the right to order attacks on London and Liverpool.




The thing is, we have nothing to suggest that Göring gave that order several days later. Many Luftwaffe documents from the night of August 24th/25th are missing, but any command to bomb London would likely have been well-documented.



Bishop also writes (page 295) that Göring was in fact displeased by the result of the raid, though no German primary sources are specifically cited for those remarks:




The breach of orders was blamed on an error in navigation. Goering, anticipating a storm of rage when Hitler heard the news, demanded to know who was responsible and threatened the guilty with a transfer to the infantry.







share|improve this answer















Yes, we have a number of reasons for believing the idea that it was an accident, based on Luftwaffe bombing patterns, the raid itself, and Hermann Göring's orders.



The Luftwaffe was not trying to destroy London.



Since the middle of 1940, the Luftwaffe had been trying to destroy the Royal Air Force, in preparating for the planned Operation Sea Lion, to conquer Britain. As such, many of the targets were RAF airfields, as well as industrial facilities:




The campaign launched in the summer of 1940 was designed to prepare the ground for the planned invasion of Britain, Operation Sea Lion, authorized by Hitler on 16 July 1940. This was to be essentially a form of longrange tactical bombing against RAF and military targets to eliminate British air defences and offensive capability.




In Fighter Boys, historian Patrick Bishop writes (page 296)




On 25 August the weight of the attacks shifted to the south and west and attacks were launched on Portland, Weymouth and Warmwell airfield in Dorset. . . On the morning of 26 August the attacks swung back to the 11 Group airfields, with a formation of forty Heinkels and twelve Dorniers making for Biggin Hill.




Bishop's point is that the attack on London was an anomaly. The Luftwaffe continued, for several weeks, to continue bombarding its old targets: airfields and industrial facilities. Moreover, the targets were not near London, merely Group 11 airfields (southeast England and the approach to London).



This was a small-scale bombing raid and poorly concentrated.



To bomb London would have been a massive shift in German strategy, and likely would not have involved merely two bombers. However, the bombs that fell that night fell in two clusters, one of which wasn't even close to London, originating from two different airplanes.



The sustained attack on London didn't begin until September 7th. This was a series of deliberate raids that involved nearly continuous daily/nightly bombing for almost two months. After a switch to nightly raids, the Luftwaffe bombed London for 76 consecutive nights. In short, if the August 24th/25th raid had been intentional, it would have been extremely uncharacteristic of the Luftwaffe's strategy during this time period.



Nothing suggests that Göring ordered it.



We know that, as of the middle of August of 1940, Germany was prepared to possible bomb London and other major British cities, in addition to their industrial and military (essentially, non-civilian) targets. However, going into August 24th/25th (including the raid that included the first bombing of central London), there was no intention to do so just yet. On August 19th, Hermann Göring issued a document stating




There can no longer be any restriction on the choice of targets. To myself I reserve only the right to order attacks on London and Liverpool.




The thing is, we have nothing to suggest that Göring gave that order several days later. Many Luftwaffe documents from the night of August 24th/25th are missing, but any command to bomb London would likely have been well-documented.



Bishop also writes (page 295) that Göring was in fact displeased by the result of the raid, though no German primary sources are specifically cited for those remarks:




The breach of orders was blamed on an error in navigation. Goering, anticipating a storm of rage when Hitler heard the news, demanded to know who was responsible and threatened the guilty with a transfer to the infantry.








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Aug 8 at 17:08

























answered Aug 8 at 14:31









HDE 226868HDE 226868

6,7251 gold badge44 silver badges54 bronze badges




6,7251 gold badge44 silver badges54 bronze badges










  • 1





    Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 14:53












  • Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:59






  • 1





    I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 15:13






  • 1





    @Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

    – Ángel
    Aug 8 at 23:58







  • 1





    @Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

    – Ángel
    Aug 9 at 0:11












  • 1





    Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 14:53












  • Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

    – bukwyrm
    Aug 8 at 14:59






  • 1





    I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    Aug 8 at 15:13






  • 1





    @Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

    – Ángel
    Aug 8 at 23:58







  • 1





    @Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

    – Ángel
    Aug 9 at 0:11







1




1





Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

– Przemysław Czechowski
Aug 8 at 14:53






Thanks for the detailed answer. Now I think that I should maybe rephrase the question to "Was bombing of civilian targets during the Battle of Britain started by an accident?" Because in listed websites the claim usually goes: there was accidentally bombing of London, then Churchill ordered bombing of Berlin as retaliation, then Hitler ordered massive bombings of London. And that's a more serious claim, and in the quora answer it's used to justify the eventual use of the atomic bomb

– Przemysław Czechowski
Aug 8 at 14:53














Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

– bukwyrm
Aug 8 at 14:59





Here a german book with sources for a non-accident version of events: books.google.de/…

– bukwyrm
Aug 8 at 14:59




1




1





I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

– Przemysław Czechowski
Aug 8 at 15:13





I also don't get this part "This then would indicate that the destruction caused by these bombs would be in an almost straight line from a point 'A' to a point 'B'. " Is this trying to refute the claim that it was an accident? The whole quote seems gramatically and logically unclear to me.

– Przemysław Czechowski
Aug 8 at 15:13




1




1





@Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

– Ángel
Aug 8 at 23:58






@Acccumulation: I find that text to be fine. I understand it to means that (a) Other people below him could order attacks on any British targets except London and Liverpool. But implicitly also that he would need to approve any attack to London or Liverpool. Presumably all attacks would need to be approved by himself before that, while he was now delegating that on lower officials.

– Ángel
Aug 8 at 23:58





1




1





@Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

– Ángel
Aug 9 at 0:11





@Acccumulation, the style is a bit unusual for English as normally written (probably because it will have been translated from German, rather than that it was written in a more literary way), but I find it applies to both sides. You could even remove the only: "To myself I reserve the right to order attacks on...", and by adding the only: "and nothing else" (thus units could choose other targets from their area)

– Ángel
Aug 9 at 0:11



Popular posts from this blog

Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?