|Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
|WorldWar2.ro Forum > Western Front (1944-1945) > The Battle of Turda/Torda/Thorenburg|
|Posted by: Dénes September 20, 2004 03:35 am|
| 60 years ago was the battle of of Turda/Torda/Thorenburg, where the largest combat in Transylvania took place. Overall, the battle lasted from September 5 to October 8, in three phases, between the German 8th and Hungarian 2nd Armies, against the Soviet 27th and Rumanian 4th Armies.
60 years ago today, on the 19th, was one of the fiercest combats between German-Hungarian and Soviet-Rumanian troops.
|Posted by: Lysimachus September 27, 2004 12:35 pm|
| Is there any order of battle, any book that would help me simulate this battle for a wargame?
|Posted by: aerialls October 01, 2004 04:49 am|
| yep... my granny knows. figthing took place over 2 weeks in trenches in Indol village.. hungarian trenches were located there. she was 16 at that time...
her brother 15, ... used to guide russian tanks troughout the countryside ... she say. Russian artilery blasted the trenches from near turda gate. Russian t34 were easily destroyed by flamethowers. A romanian plane was downed and the villagers were called upon to see the fact... She has many storyes upon those events... Don't know how reliable they are Grenades and projectiles left in the arrable land made victims until the 60's.
|Posted by: BobM October 10, 2004 06:29 pm|
| I'd love to find a good (online) topographical map of the area, even better a scan from a book dealing with the battle. Ive wanted to put a wargames scenario together of this battle for a while but I'm lacking a decent map and a detailed OB
|Posted by: aerialls October 10, 2004 07:09 pm|
| hi there...
you should improvise or imagine the battle: russian - romanian forces towards
S-E S S-V, hungarian and german forces in the north and middle i guess...
maybe Denes will help you with the oob if he can.
the first map is descentred... the large areea in the S-V is mountaneous.
|Posted by: Dani October 12, 2004 07:20 am|
I found something in some books from 1960 to 1980 but I have to compile and put together those informations. Maybe in few days I'll be able to post a close view to oob.
|Posted by: mabadesc October 14, 2004 01:54 am|
| I would be very interested in reading your findings on this battle, Dani. If you have the time, please do post some info., and please don't forget to include unit commanders if you have the names...
|Posted by: BobM October 16, 2004 06:05 pm|
Thanks but I'm looking for something much more detailed. Topographical map at 1:100000 or 1:200000 would be excellent
|Posted by: dragos October 16, 2004 07:33 pm|
| Try these:
|Posted by: Lysimachus October 18, 2004 10:43 am|
Great satellite view!!
Thank you for these links. Any ideas for the oob?
|Posted by: Dani October 18, 2004 01:36 pm|
| For OOB please allow me 1-2 days more. I haven't time enough last week.
|Posted by: Dénes October 18, 2004 02:22 pm|
| Yesterday there was an official commemoration of the battle of Turda, held by Hungarian and Rumanian officials.
According to the Duna TV report (http://www.dunatv.hu/hirado/?200410170016) the Hungarian and German troops held the front around Turda against the tenfold numerical superiority of Soviet and Rumanian forces for 4 weeks. Reportedly, the Battle of Turda was one of the best defensive operations of the Royal Hungarian Honvédség. The Honvéd forces suffered 2500 KIAs and 7500 MIAs and POWs.
A monument was erected in the memory of the fallen Hungarian soldiers.
|Posted by: Dénes October 18, 2004 06:33 pm|
| An interesting and colourful appearance at the ceremonies held at Turda on the week-end was János Fenyvesi, a US Vietnam war veteran of Hungarian origin, who lost his father around Turda, in the Fall of 1944. In his speech, he noted: "in the jungles of Vietnam, eye-to-eye with Death, I realized that I must find out where my father rests on the battlefield. It was only much later, when I've heard of József Pataky, head of the local soldiers' grave maintenance committee, who informed me about the whereabouts of my father's final resting place."
Béla Markó, leader of the ****, noted the following: "Since [the Peace Treaty of] Trianon [of 1921], they continuously try to hammer into us that hero could be only someone who eventually won, who ended the war on the victor's side. Today, however, we could achieve progress, thus they now can accept and acknowledge: heroes were among the losers, too.
Today we realise, not solely one side can hold the ultimate truth, it can be shared by both sides, Hungarians and Rumanians of Transylvania alike.
Today we either jointly hold the truth, or jointly fail."
|Posted by: Dénes October 19, 2004 03:00 pm|
| Here are a few historical details related to the beginning of the Battle of Turda/Torda/Thorenburg, as given by a detailed Hungarian newspaper article:
Soviet mechanized units anticipated to occupy Turda (Torda) and Cluj (Kolozsvár) without any trouble. However, the advancing Red Army armoured units were stopped by the IIIrd Battalion of the Hungarian 25th Infantry Division (headquartered at Nagyvárad, in Rumanian Oradea, in German Grosswardein), at the road intersection at Vintul de Sus (in Hungarian Felvinc, in German Oberwintz) on Sept. 13.
The first three Soviet tanks were knocked out by Hungarian AT cannon section of the III./25 ID. The rest of the armoured column then spread out and attacked the defenders. With the help of a German AT unit, the Hungarians knocked out [an estimated] further 17 tanks. The attack was thus stopped, the Soviets regrouped and retreated to defensive positions. The attack was relaunched in the next days, but could not penetrate the defenders' lines.
Subsequently, the city of Turda changed hands several times, sometimes in bloody hand-to-hand combat and was finally taken by Soviet-Rumanian units only in early October 1944.
It's noteworthy that the entire enlisted personnel of the III./25 ID and another company was promoted one rank up for bravery on the battlefield - an unprecedented move in the history of the Honvédség.
|Posted by: Dénes October 25, 2004 08:40 pm|
| Here is a more detailed description of the Battle of Turda/Torda of September/October 1944 (excerpt from a book manuscript):
|Posted by: aerialls October 25, 2004 08:51 pm|
|That's a great description.|
|Posted by: dragos October 25, 2004 08:52 pm|
Many sources give Oarba de Mures as the most dramatic and bloodiest confrontation between Romanians and the Axis troops.
|Posted by: Lysimachus November 05, 2004 06:54 am|
|Thank you for this great description. I will try to make a campaign for The Last Crusade ame out of these informations.|
|Posted by: BobM November 05, 2004 11:57 am|
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 04:53 pm|
| Very nice and detailed map, Bob M. Thanks.
What is the source?
The main problem with it is the lack of Rumanian and German names of the localities and geographic points, which hinders the pinpointing of the action to current Rumanian, or wartime German maps.
This reinforces, once again, my view that when dealing with multi-ethnic territories, as Transylvania is, a scholarly historian should always mention the names in all local languages and represent the borders as they were in that particular time period - as I try to do in my writings and for which receive heavy flak from some people with narrow views.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 05:52 pm|
| Anyone interested can find the Romanian names on this map easy.
Is this for Transylvania or in general, because theoretically local ethnicity and combatants does not necessary cross each other? In order to be consistent with this method, you should happen to use, let's say 4-5 names for each locality (the official name, the names used by ethnic minorities, the name used by combatants etc)
Let's be honest and say that such things as the names used will always remain at the latitude of the author.
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 06:36 pm|
I doubt that, mainly for those who were not born in that region. Here is a quiz for anyone. Try to find the Rumanian name for 'A GYERES', shown on the map. The German name would be next...
This rule of thumb is obviously valid for all Europe, not only Transylvania. I just gave it as an example because the above map does deal with Transylvania.
Now putting your attemp of irony aside, by local languages I meant of course the languages widely used locally, which have historical roots. As you may know, in Transylvania these languages are Rumanian, Hungarian and German, or in Bessarabia: Rumania, Russian, Ukrainian and sometimes German (see, for ex. Cetatea Alba, Belgorod, Bilhorod, Akkerman - all denoting the same city).
What I failed to note, because it was obvious to me, is that the usage of names in different languages is recommended mainly for texts written not in these languages (for example, I don't expect a Rumanian text to write anything but Cluj, or Cluj-Napoca - but not Cluj-Napoca in historical context - a Hungarian text Kolozsvár, or a German text Klausenburg), languages which have wide international spread, e.g. English, or French.
You hit the nail on its head, albeit probably inadvertently, when raising the issue of "the official name". By "the official name" - in my view, at least - one should use as the main form the official name existing on the very time period the action takes place in history, which might be different today. For example - to move a bit away from Eastern Europe - I think the historian should use the name Königsberg when describing a W.W. 2 era action (mentioning the city's Polish name as well), and not the current official Russian name of Kaliningrad.
Of course, every author uses his/her approach to history. It's a free world after all - honestly.
However, ignoring such historical details, may put in doubt his/her thoroughness or impartiality in tacling a historical topic.
Lt. Col. Dénes
P.S. I would like to hear other people's opinion too about this topic.
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 08:58 pm|
| Szind = Sănduleşti
Szt Mihalyfalva = Mihai Viteazul
Sinfalva = Moldoveneşti
Tur = Tureni
Aranyoslona = Luna
A-Gyeres = Câmpia Turzii
Egerbegy = Viişoara
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 09:00 pm|
Can you be more specific?
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 09:05 pm|
| Sorry, keyboard problems.
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 09:11 pm|
| I have to check my lists for the matching Rumanian names.
Now, how about the German names?
On the other hand, what if the names of the villages are embedded in text, so one cannot simply guess them by connecting the dots of identified larger localities shown on the map?
And I am still looking forward to hearing other peoples' opinions.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 09:17 pm|
Who's asking for them?
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 09:21 pm|
| Whoever has access to German documents or books related to the 'Schacht am Thorenburg'...
Lt. Col. Dénes
P.S. You did not address my explanations and clarifications given to your earlier points.
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 09:46 pm|
| The principles expressed by you here sound fine.
Please refresh my memory and tell me about your book "Rumanian Air Force The Prime Decade 1939-1946", on the cover map, how did you use the names for the localities in Bessarabia?
|Posted by: Dénes November 05, 2004 09:55 pm|
Since the map shows the situation existing at start of 'Operation Barbarossa', June 22, 1941 - as mentioned in the footnote - the main names of localities in Bessarabia are in Russian, while the Rumanian and German ones, if any, in brackets.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 10:07 pm|
That is ok. I remembered wrongly.
As I have said, what you expressed here is logical, with an objection regarding the official names. The relevance of these official names is very little regarding a small timeframe and when established during wartime, without an international recognition.
|Posted by: dragos November 05, 2004 11:04 pm|
As seen here, it seems that the Germans also used maps with Hungarian names:
Most of their factory maps had probably Hungarian and Romanian sources.
|Posted by: Dénes November 06, 2004 12:15 am|
| Below is a map taken from a scholarly historical book dealing with the Luftwaffe, written by a collective of four authors, published in Germany, in 2003.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: Victor November 06, 2004 07:28 am|
Maybe next year, during the medieval festival.
My opinion is that your correct about the use of town names, as it will make it easier to identify them and relate them to other works in different languages.
Btw, isn't Akkerman Turkish?
|Posted by: Dénes November 07, 2004 04:01 am|
Just for fun, I double checked the Rumanian version of the names you listed (I mention only those that are not entirely correct):
Szt. Mihályfalva (actually, without 'falva', which means village) was called back then Sânmihaiu-de-Sus. Only in the post-war era was renamed in more Rumanian sounding Mihai Viteazu (without the 'l' at the end).
Sinfalva is actually Cornesti in Rumanian. The Hungarian name of Moldovenesti is Várfalva.
The rest is O.K.; however, the enclosed map does not always give the complete Hungarian names of localities, e.g. 'Egerbegy', as shown, is actually 'Aranyosegerbegy' (there is an 'Egerbegy' elsewhere in Transylvania).
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 07, 2004 09:29 am|
| Thanks for clarifications.
The following localities on the map that I have been unable to identify:
- A. Polyan
|Posted by: Dénes November 10, 2004 01:34 am|
- Pusztacsán = Ceaunu Mic
- Komjátszeg = Comsesti
- Koppánd = Copaceni
- Mészkö = Cheia
- Keresztes = Oprisani
- A[ranyos]Polyán = Poiana
- Mezöörke = Urca
Mind you, I did not check a current detailed map of Rumania to see if all these localities actually are around Turda.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: Dénes November 10, 2004 10:13 pm|
This is a common error done by many historians, namely regarding and describing the historical events in hindsight and not turning back in time to the particular historical period they are studying.
Back then, during the war, it was not clear at all that the official names will be short lived. It's only now that we know, in hindsight, that they lasted only a few years.
This is no excuse not to use the names and borders valid officially during the time period described in a historical study.
Similarly, I would encourage the usage of Rumanian names (along with Russian and German, if any) of various Bessarabian localities when we're talking about war, regardless the fact that they were officially valid even for a shorter period than the Hungarian names in Northern Transylvania.
As for the note "without an international recognition", this is obviously not true, as the Rumanian-Hungarian territorial changes and new border between 1940 and 1944 were recognized by many states, including Rumania herself.
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 10, 2004 11:55 pm|
But today we know. A historian's job is to present the past events to the people of today. Therefor, for better understanding names and places, it is better to use actual places with the temporary names as hindsights. While the official names used during the short period must be mentioned, the attention must be focused on the current names.
Let alone Romania, who you know very well that followed the goal of undoing this act because it was forced to accept it, how many of the United Nation countries officially recognized this act? It's like saying that Poland must be erased from history during 1939-1945, because the borders changed with the military operations.
P.S. One exception regarding the locality names is the Polish town of Oswiecim. It remained in history as an epitome of the Nazi doctrine (Auschwitz). I think there is no reason for a town in Transylvania to "gain" such a reputation.
|Posted by: Dénes November 11, 2004 01:33 am|
I beg to disagree here.
There are countless cases when it's not recommended the usage of current names, but rather the names in effect during the war should be used by historians. One such clear case is Stalingrad, rather than the current Volgograd. Königsbers vs. Kaliningrad is another good example. Or the Eastern Prussian towns and villages, part of Germany during the war, currently in Poland (Danzig vs. Gdansk, Stettin vs. Szczezin, etc.).
Or, closer to home, would you advocate the usage (in non-Rumanian text, of course) of Chernovtsy, or Czernowitz, instead of Cernauti, or Kiliya instead of Chilia, both located in historical Bessarabia, when talking of the 1941-1944 period?
Hindsight is rarely an effective tool for the historians (except for 'what-if' scenarios).
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: dragos November 11, 2004 08:43 am|
While I agree to some of these particular cases, given the reputation these places have earned, I would not recommend it in the case of the localities in Transylvania. Using for example Nagyvarad instead of Oradea would not help much people that are not very accustomed with local history.
|Posted by: BobM November 13, 2004 09:10 am|
Does anyone have a map showing where Vintul de Sus (in Hungarian Felvinc, in German Oberwintz) is?
|Posted by: Dénes November 13, 2004 03:56 pm|
Lt. Col. Dénes
|Posted by: Dénes November 15, 2004 10:23 pm|
Well, that's exactly why I always use/suggest using all main forms for a certain locality, so people could not accustomed with local history could find it easier in any maps of the period.
Therefore, when talking of the 1940-1944 time period, it would be Nagyvárad (Oradea Mare, Großwardein). Or Brasov (Brassó, Kronstadt).
BTW, you conveniently skipped my previous question, which could help clarifying the issue:
|Posted by: dragos November 16, 2004 10:41 am|
Yes, why not? For non-Romanian target audience it would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernivtsi (Cernauti in Romanian), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oradea (Nagyvarad in Hungarian, Grosswardein in German). However some localities in Bessarabia like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chisinau can be used as given, as they can be found under the same name nowadays.
|Posted by: Victor November 16, 2004 12:35 pm|
|You guys are wandering off-topic here.|
|Posted by: Dénes November 16, 2004 03:20 pm|
I smell double standards...
P.S. Obeying Victor's request, this is my last post regarding the proper usage of localities' names in historical context, as I believe I have proven my point.
|Posted by: dragos November 16, 2004 04:37 pm|
| Before addressing me you should have checked the author. However I don't advocate changing the article, because at least I don't pretend to be Mr. Objectivity.
Case closed from my side too.
|Posted by: Victor November 16, 2004 08:04 pm|
|I wrote the article, not Dragos.|
|Posted by: Lysimachus November 18, 2004 04:48 pm|
| To come back to the original topic, does anyone has the oob of that battle?
|Posted by: Dénes November 28, 2004 08:21 pm|
| Death Card of a Wehrmacht soldier, KIA on Oct. 6, 1944.
|Posted by: Dani November 29, 2004 01:55 pm|
|It's Oradea known as Grosswardein,Oradea-Mare,Nagy-Varad,Nagy-Várad.|
|Posted by: Dani November 29, 2004 02:01 pm|
Apologies for not posting as promised the oob. As soon as possible I'll post.
|Posted by: BobM December 01, 2004 08:05 am|
Found an online history of the Torda battle :-) cant read it though as its in Hungarian and the machine tramslator is awful :-(
|Posted by: Ahmed December 18, 2004 04:57 pm|
Actually, Pusztacsán should be Ceanu Mic, not Ceaunu. This is how everybody refers to it, and that's how it's spelled on the map. And yes, all these localities are in fact more or less close to Turda, except Mezöörke (= Urca) and Komjátszeg( = Comsesti) wich I couldn't find (I'll have to look on a more detailed map).
Couldn't help noticing the thread is dying, wich is a shame as this is an interesting topic.
|Posted by: Dénes December 18, 2004 06:34 pm|
That's exactly what I wrote in my earlier post.
I posted what I know from the Hungarian-German side.
I am also very interested in continuing this thread.
It would be nice to read what the Rumanian side (and Soviet, of course) knows about this important and prolonged battle in Transylvania.
|Posted by: BobM December 19, 2004 08:30 am|
Some of the above link translated bu my friend Chris
On September 13 the advanced squadrons of the soviet 6. Guards Tank Army’s 5. Guards Tank Corps opened fire with tank guns on the 25. Infantry Regiment’s defences. This signalled the beginning of the battle of Torda. At noon at Bágy a group of 12 tanks broke into the Torda bridgehead. Lieutenant Karoly Szentágotai commanding 25. AT Company stopped the soviets with 3 shots. In the afternoon the Tordai bridgehead came under artillery fire. On the 14th the remaining 9 tanks, with Rumanian infantry, crossed the Aranyos, and attacked up the Hosszú [Long] glen on the southeast of Torda.
On the 14th the Aranyosegerbegy bridgehead was attacked for the first time. The Rumanian 7. Infantry Division, with Soviet tanks, pushed back the 26/III. battalion, but did not break through the main line of resistance along the Aranyos. The Rumanian 18. Infantry Division, again with Soviet tanks, crossed the Aranyos, seized the [foothills? Dike?] along the river, and penetrated the main defensive line in the valley of the Szent János brook 3km east of Torda. The 3/5. Motorised Rifle Battalion gave up the Marosludas crossing, after the arrival of Soviet infantry.
By dawn on the 15th the Soviets had thrown bridges across at Keresztes, by which reinforcements crossed, and during the day 6. Guards Tank Army’s 9. Guards Motorised Corps entered the fray. The Soviet-Rumanian Mihajlov-group with 25 tanks occupied Torda-Sósfürdo, and reached the southernmost edge of the Szalonnás hills, the northernmost point of Torda. The Rumanian 7. Division occupied the Aranyosegerbegy bridgehead, the 26. Infantry Regiment was forced up the Péterlaka dales into the hills along it to the east. The 2. Panzer Division’s 3. Motorised Rifle Regiment (commander Colonel István Vaska, September from the 26th Colonel Jeno Altorjay Jeno) launched a counterattack in two directions, in the the Szent János and the Péterlaka glens but did not reach the original main defensive line. By evening the two soviet bridgeheads combined.
On the 16th the 25. Infantry Regiment and the 6. Motorised Rifle Battalion started an attack to clear the junction of the Szent János and the Péterlaka glens, but did not achieve its aims. Next day the 4. and 6. Motorised Rifle Battalions renewed the attack, but it was stalled by very strong defensive artillery fire.
On the 17th between the Gyalui alps eastern foothills the soviet 35. Guards Corps latched onto the attack, and at Torda so did the 104. Rifle Corps. Between the mountains, in the Jara stream valley, the Soviet spearheads reached the 2. Mountain Replacement Brigade’s line of battle at Magyarpeterd at the Torda gorge’s northern exit.
On the 18 Sperrverband Kessel took over the direction of operations in the mountains, and command of the Hungarian 1. and 2. Mountain Replacement Brigades. Lieutenant-general Mortimer von Kessel’s group was created from the 905. Panzer group, the 1015., 1176. Assault Gun Battalions, the 721. AT Battalion, the Brandenburg Infantry Regiment III. battalion, the II/241. Luftwaffe AA Battalion, the 92. Panzer Pioneer Battalion, the 52. Pioneer Battalion, as well as the Heckle-, the Gradient- and the Eder-group. The 25. Infantry Division, the 2. Panzer Division, and the 7. and 9. Field Replacement Division remained under the Hungarian II. Corps.
September 19-étol, independently the csapatrészek hovatartozásától, the defence direction the 25. gyaloghadosztály, the counter-offensives the 2. páncéloshadosztály commander vette through. THE II. legion mickle ereju counterattack started. Colonel Géza Böszörményi, the commander of 25th Infantry Regiment commanded the western group comprising the 25/II. and III. Infantry Battalions, the Hungarian 10. Assault Artillery Battalion, the German 6. and 1179. Assault Gun Battalions; Colonel László Balsay, the 3. Tank Regiment commander’s eastern group included the 3/I. and II. Tank Battalion, the 4. and 6. Motorised Rifle Battalions, the 52. Armoured SPAA Battalion and the 2/2. Armoured Pioneer Company. The reserve comprising 25/I. Infantry Battalion, 25. Armoured Reconnaissance Battalion, 5. Motorised Rifle Battalion, 2/1. Armoured Pioneer Company and one section of the 3. Tank Regiment was deployed in Torda-Sósfürdo, or Mezoörké, under Colonel István Vaska. The defence of Torda was entrusted to the 1. Infantry Regiment commander, Colonel Lipót Kelety. The fire of the supporting artillery group was directed by the 2. Panzer Division’s artillery commander, Colonel Károly Merényi.
The western group reached the [dike? Ridót] 1 km north of the Aranyos between Sósfürdo and the Szent János stream, but was stopped by the heroic death of the Torda-born Colonel Böszörményi near Sósfürdo. The eastern group also initially gained ground, but although the 5. Motorised Rifle Battalion was thrown into the fight, the attack stalled before it got out of the hill line into the Péterlaka glen. Rumanian aircraft also took part in repelling an attack [by predominantly German aircraft?]. The next couple of days were relatively peaceful, while the two sides were "licking their wounds".
On September 22 the climax of the struggle began, the second stage of the battle of Torda. To the west of Torda in the Jara and Hasada valleys one Soviet and two Rumanian divisions, and two motorised [mechanized?] brigades broke through. The Tordai gorge was lost. A further one soviet and two Rumanian divisions supported by the 6th Guards Tank Brigade and Soviet aircraft broke out from the bridgehead seized north of the Aranyos. The 4th. Motor Rifle Battalion held a blocking position in the Péterlaka glen, the 3/II. Tank Battalion blocked the Sos glen. The former to the north-west, and the latter to the north-east […]. […]. The Soviet tanks breaking into the Sos glen were 4 km from the Rumanian 18th Infantry Division to the north-west of Torda at Szind, on the threshold of Torda. The eastern attacker groupment reached the Fibulae- mounts.
The 1/I. Infantry Battalion and the 10/2. Assault Artillery Battery’s counterattack started the closing of the Sos glen. The counterattack surprised the Soviet 46th Guards Tank Brigade. Captain? Janos Bozsoki’s 6 Zrínyi-II assault howitzers knocked out 18 T-34 in the Sósfürdo glen, then scattered the infantry surrounding the 25th Reconnaissance Battalion. In the Sósfürdo area 5 Zrínyi crews were killed or wounded. Their commander Bozsoki fought his way back with his vehicle, got the casualties to the two assault guns still mobile, they pulled out, then the 10/1. Assault Artillery Battery with 4 Zrínyis drove the Russians from the vicinity of Sósfürdo, and extracted the 3 knocked out vehicles as well. This action, which earned the Hungarian Officer the Gold Medal of Valour, stopped Torda from being encircled.
In this critical situation, on the morning of the 23rd the German 23. Panzer Division launched a counterattack. The eastern group reached the Aranyos at Aranyosegerbegy, drove three divisions back behind the river, then turned west towards the bogged down western group. They broke out into the completely flat south of the [floodplain?] between Torda and Aranyosegerbegy, where [?-general] Josef von Radowitz, the divisional commander halted the attack. That advance exposed the AFVs to the direct fire of the Soviet artillery. According to Norbert Számvéber’s research the 23. Panzer Regiment, the 126., 128. Panzer Grenadier Regiments and the 23. Panzer Reconnaissance Battalion had altogether 36 Pz.V Panther, 6 Pz.IV, 2 Pz.III, 16 StuG.IV and StuG.III assault guns, as well as 4 Marder, 4 Wespe and 3 Hummel, to which Lieutenant-colonel Alajos Sághy’s 3/II. Tank Battalion with 7 Turan I tanks was attached. On the 24th part of the division carried out a counterattack to clear the Kolozsvár-Torda highway through the Turi glen, then next day redeployed to the Nagyvárad area.
On September 24 one soviet rifle division and two Rumanian infantry divisions, with a mechanized brigade, the Plane- alps foot-hill between, Szelicsén through the shed northerly side run into, s adown already only 10 km elected off Kolozsvártól. 25-am I further teret won in the mountains, where he comes from began more German group subtraction the szászrégeni line of battle averment. Helyüket the 7. camp póthadosz- abscess vette through. The e in the day extradited soviet straight the Southeast- Plain kialakítandó csapásméro groupment parted be the 6. gárda-harckocsihadsereget. The 2. Cavalry- Motorised Group of 5. Guards Cavalry Corps took up position by Torda.
|Posted by: Ahmed December 19, 2004 10:57 am|
| Good post, BobM.
Unfortunately there are a lot of names in this story that sound realy unfamiliar (i.e. Szelicsén, Hosszú, Mezoörké, etc). This is why I definitly support Denes's ideea to provide names in all relevant languages.
|Posted by: dragos January 28, 2005 10:37 pm|
|The disposition of Romanian troops at Turda|
|Posted by: Dragos1984 July 21, 2005 01:37 am|
| hey guys.. just to let you know that ill be comming to Romania on Aug 25th and ill be staying there for University (6 years) and im bringing my metal detector with me, i was wandering if any of you guys are interested in going and searching around Turda and all the other battle sites such as Oarba de Mures etc for battle relics ,. let me know if any one wants to tag along for the hunt. ill be staying mostly in Cluj and Sibiu.. let me know what u think... my email is : email@example.com
|Posted by: ^All^ March 23, 2006 02:51 pm|
That's Ceanu Mic...Ceaunu Mic is little pot And the localities listed below are near Turda. Comsesti is aproximatly at the half of the distance between Cluj-Napoca and Turda.
|Posted by: Florin April 11, 2006 07:22 pm|
| How many Romanian soldiers died in the battle for Turda? I could not get this from this topic. Maybe it is mentioned, and maybe I missed it somehow.
And how many soldiers of the Red Army died there?
|Posted by: Florin April 14, 2006 12:51 pm|
Well, I double-checked, and there is no mention in this topic about how many Romanian soldiers, or how many Soviet soldiers, died in the group of battles for Turda / Oarba de Mures.
Maybe my question is trivial... Especially considering that the topic started with the reminder: "...one of the finest defensive operations of..." whatever.
|Posted by: Dénes April 14, 2006 02:14 pm|
The battles in and around Turda and Oarba de Mures were two different events. There is about 40 km distance between the two locations.
The largest and longest battles took place in Turda area.
I didn't get this. Can you elaborate?
|Posted by: Florin April 14, 2006 03:40 pm|
I asked two simple questions (Romanian and Soviet casualties, in number of soldiers) and because there is still no answer posted to it, it makes me feel that this is one of the neglected parts of this story - at least in this topic, up to now.
trivial 1. Relatively insignificant: UNIMPORTANT. 2. Commonplace: ordinary. (Riverside Websters's II New College Dictionary, 1995; page 1181)
Regarding my quoting of the "one of the best defensive operations of the Royal Hungarian Honvédség":
If the text would be "one of the best defensive operations of the Axis", then yes, I would write an answer. But as "one of the best defensive operations of the Royal Hungarian Honvédség", I have nothing to comment, add or argue about it.
|Posted by: Florin April 14, 2006 06:10 pm|
I learn from here that 2 armies were facing other 2 armies.
(I highlighted tenfold, which was not in bold letters in the original quote.)
How is that? "Tenfold" means "ten times". And I repeat: I see 2 armies facing other 2 armies. Usually, a German army as an operational group was bigger and stronger than a Soviet army.
It is my turn to write: I do not understand this. Please detail it.
|Posted by: Dénes April 14, 2006 06:38 pm|
| First of all, obviously not all units of the above quoted two+two armies took part in the described battle. Also, at that time, the Axis armies were much weaker than in theory, that's why the Allies' numerical superiority, which was often tenfolds in manpower and heavy armament.
As for the Allies' overall losses, I didn't reply, because momentarily I don't have the numbers. Perhaps when the long-awaited Hungarian book on the Transylvanian battle arena finally arrives, I can tell you more.
|Posted by: dragos03 April 14, 2006 07:12 pm|
|So, are you saying that the Soviet-Romanian troops had a tenfold numerical superiority at the battle of Turda?|
|Posted by: Florin April 14, 2006 07:34 pm|
As a personal opinion, I think from his answer does not result this.
Obviously as total manpower and firepower, the Romanians and their new allies, the Soviets, did not have ten times more strength than their Hungarian and German opponents in the battlefield area discussed under this topic.
If locally the Romanians or the Soviets were able to focus forces ten times bigger than their entrenched adversary, this says something about the organizational skills and combat value of the Romanian and Soviet commanders.
|Posted by: Dénes April 14, 2006 08:31 pm|
| What I've wanted to say, based on the sources I've read, is that locally the Allied attackers often had tenfold numerical superiority than the Axis defenders.
If you have data that gives the manpower strength otherwise, post it here.
|Posted by: Florin April 25, 2006 04:28 am|
I could not answer earlier, because I had an exam/test this Saturday - April 22.
Wasn't this the point in any offensive, since the beginning of history? To focus maximum strength where your want to break your enemy? I agree, when it is happening to have more in numbers (but not that much more), it is easier to build a local overwhelming force.
With skills and intelligence, that local superiority can be achieved even against an enemy bigger in numbers - examples are countless.
I can give you an example where on a whole front the ratio was 1 to 10 at a given moment. At the end of August 1944, after the Germans withdrew from Paris, the great plains of northern France were ideal for tank-against-tank battles, and that was the only way to halt the Allies. But in that moment the ratio in tanks between Western Allies versus Germany, in France, was 10 to 1, so only the shortage of gasoline stopped the Allies at the border of Germany.
Unfortunately for the Romanian Army, it never enjoyed such superiority in numbers anywhere it faced the German+Hungarian enemy, even with the Soviet help. Hitler never neglected that part of the frontlines. In Autumn 1944, the Hungarian Army received Tiger tanks - but not more than 25 pieces, at very best, to be fair. Or remember "Spring Awakening", in a moment when Berlin and Eastern Germany were in much need for all that force wasted in Hungary.
|Posted by: C-2 July 25, 2006 07:32 pm|
| Hehe !
I found a veteran from the battle of Turda!
I never knew he was a war veteran.
And I took "a few " interw. to veterans....
Hopefuly soon a story about his part in the battle.
Till now all he told me was "I almost took part in the German side".
|Posted by: mabadesc January 24, 2007 02:28 pm|
We're still waiting....
Seriously, get off your butt, ask your uncle some detailed questions (if you haven't already), and post the info...
I think this thread should be revived...
I re-read the whole thread, and there was actually some serious information gathering, at least from the Axis side. We need to complete the picture with info from the Soviet-Romanian side. This thread was a good start, let's continue it...
We should be focusing more on this type of stuff. Honestly, would you rather read another extremist Iran/Irak/US post, regardless of which "side" it takes?
|Posted by: Lysimachus February 20, 2007 08:30 am|
| For the battle of Torda, can someone confirm me this Romanian order of battle:
4th Romanian army
- 6th Territorial Corps (18 Mountain-Training Division, 7th Infantry-Training Division)
- Motorized Corps (8th Cavalry-motorized Division, 1st Cavalry Division, 9th Infantry Division, "Niculescu" Armored Detachment)
- 6th Army Corps (6 Infantry-Training Division, 11 Infantry-Training Division, 21 Infantry-Training Division)
|Posted by: Dénes September 12, 2009 07:10 pm|
| Today a remembrance was held at Turda (Torda), in memory of the 2,500 Hungarian soldiers who fell in the famous battle in that area, in September/October 1944.
http://www.dunatv.hu/otthon/tordai_csata.html (in Hungarian).
|Posted by: ANDREAS March 09, 2010 01:23 am|
| I synthesize and possibly add some information about the German-Hungarian Troops involved in the Turda battle:
- the hungarian 25. Infantry Division with Major General Hollósy-Kuthy László in command and Major Adonyi-Naredy Ferenc as chief of staff, at least 25. and 26. Infantry Regiments mentioned
- the hungarian 2. Armored Division with Major General Zsedényi Zoltán in command and Lieutenant Colonel Rugonyi György as chief of staff, at least the 3. motorized infantry regiment mentioned
flanked by the 7. and 9. Infantry (recruits?) Divisions and 1. and 2. Mountain Brigades, all part of the II. Army Corps of the Hungarian Army.
Later after 18 september the german Panzer Group lead by Lieutenant General Mortimer von Kessel with Sturmgeschütz-Brigade 905, 1015. and 1176. Sturmgeschütz-Abteilungen, 721. Panzerjager Abteilung, III Battalion of Brandenburg Jäger Regiment and several smaller units have strengthened the forces of the II. Army Corps. From 19 september the hungarian 10. Assault Gun Battalion, the german 6. and 1179. Sturmgeschütz/Panzerjager-Abteilungen and the hungarian 3. Armored Regiment and the 52. Armored Antiaircraft Battalion are mentioned in the fighting in the area.
After 23 september, units of the german 23. Panzer Division (Generalleutnant Josef von Radowitz) -126. and 128. Panzergrenadier Regiments and 23. Reconnaissance Battalion with tank support - probably of the 23. Panzer Regiment - 36 Pz.V Panther A and 6 Pz.IV H, 2 Pz.III N, 16 StuG.IV and StuG.III assault guns, and 4 Marder-III, 4 Wespe 105mm and 3 Hummel 150mm SP Howitzers entered the battle but only for short time.
The source - The German 23rd Armoured Division in the Battle at Torda - Számvéber Norbert and A tordai csata - Ravazs István.
I'll also try to rebuild the Soviet-Romanian forces involved in the battle.
|Posted by: contras March 09, 2010 07:13 am|
|After I read about it in veterans memories, until the battle at Miraslau, where the German-Hungarian advance was stopped, there were just Romanian border guards and infantery. It is interesting to know OOB.|
|Posted by: ANDREAS March 09, 2010 09:00 pm|
| The Romanian forces engaged in the battle, reconstructed from the sources already mentioned and the ones I'll say later were:
-for 5 to 8 september 1944 : Cluj Regional Battalion, March Battalion from 83. Infantry Regiment/ 20th Instruction Infantry Division in defense on the demarcation line (south-east of Cluj), other 2 battalions of the 83. Infantry Regiment in Turda area.
Probably some unknown border guard units were also in position.
They went into combat at the outbreak of the Hungarian offensive in September 5th with units of the 9th hungarian Field Replacement Division (identified a regiment from this division as the 34th infantry regiment) attacking from south-east of Apahida and Feleacu areas and the 7th hungarian Field Replacement Division attacking from Gilau-Floresti areas towards Buru and Turda.
I will continue after documenting...
|Posted by: Zoltan December 12, 2011 08:28 pm|
Hi, do you have any information on the Hungarian 12th mountain batalion at the Battle of Torda? Which mountain brigade did it belong to?
|Posted by: ANDREAS December 14, 2011 09:45 pm|
|I read everything I had about this battle but no, unfortunately, I haven't found any details on the composition of the mountain (replacement) brigades!|
|Posted by: aidan zea October 07, 2012 09:08 pm|
Florin, here you stand for the fact that Hungary had received in the autumn of 1944 some 25 Tiger tanks, fact that is wrong! Hungary received indeed a relatively limited number of tanks, assault guns, tank destroyers and other armored vehicles from autumn 1944 but no such numbers of Tiger tanks. Practically is unknown if even the three Tiger tanks who is said to have been formally delivered to Magyar Kiralyi Honvedseg in late 1944 were not in fact the only ones remaining from the first (and maybe only) batch of Tiger I tanks, delivered to the 2nd (MKH) Armoured Division in april 1944 when this unit was fighting alongside Germans in the Carpathian Region in south-western Ukraine. It is known that 10 Pzkpfw VI Tiger Ausf. E were delivered to the 3rd Armd. Regiment /2nd (MKH) Armoured Division, unit that fought the Soviet forces until august 1944. This unit did a very nice figure in combat, being appreciated by the Germans, with similar achievements to Wehrmacht elite units! When the 3rd Armd. Regiment was withdrawn from the Galitian front, he had only 3 remaining Pzkpfw VI Tiger Ausf. E! This heavy tanks were used later, in october 1944, in the Debrecen operation, with the 2nd (MKH) Armoured Division!
|Posted by: Agarici October 13, 2013 04:01 pm|
| Does anyone knows which was the total number of tanks and AFV involved into the battle, on each side? On the German/Hungarian side we had the Kessel Group, then the 23rd Panzer Division, plus several assault-gun battalions, and the Hungarian 2nd Armoured Division (plus independent SPG battalions?). On the Soviet/Romanian side fought 5th Soviet Guard Tank Corps from the 6th Guard Tank Army and Niculescu/4th Army Armoured Detachment.
What I can say for the beginning is that the strenght of Niculescu Detachment (10 T 4 tanks, 10 TAS and 12 TACAM R 2) was close to a battalion. The question is what was the added up strenght of the 4th Army Armoured Detachment, for the figures indicated here on the site are smaller than the sum of the AFV of Matei and Niculescu detachments formed earlier in August 1944.
|Posted by: sylviashea January 21, 2018 07:58 pm|
|Hi! Thanks for sharing this post! It's essential! To be honest, I did not know about the total number of tanks and AFV involved into the battle!|