Been doing a small amount of collecting of historical documents from WWII--mostly stuff related to the US administration and JCS (coming out of the Leahy biography). Wont spend more than $100 for a letter. Received an announcement of this item coming up for sale.
Its a very odd piece. It was a marshal's baton made up by the Vichy France government for William Leahy in 1942. It has a date both Petain and Leahy's name, and is rather ornate in its decoration.
My guess is that is was never actually given to Leahy as he headed back to Washington to work with FDR in the Spring of 1942. He never records having it in his diary and I saw no mention of it. Indeed pretty sure Leahy would have been embarrassed by it.
It was also just sold by a German auction house. So it might never have left Europe. I was interested just to see what would happen with it. What do you think it cost?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Phillips P. OBrien

Phillips P. OBrien Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PhillipsPOBrien

10 May
Intrigued by how people denigrate what the French had to face in 1940 while forgetting that the French were fighting a more powerful Wehrmacht than was used to attack the USSR in 1941. Yes you have heard that right. France had to fight a stronger Germany than the Russians!
What you say, that can’t be because there were more tanks attacking Russia? Thats true for tanks; as there somewhat over 3000 German tanks involved in Barbarossa and only a little over 2500 when they attacked France.
Yet the small difference is dwarfed by the much smaller Air Force that the Germans were able to use to support Barbarossa. It was approximately half the size.
Read 9 tweets
9 May
The real answer to this question is France's contribution in the victory was extremely important--for reasons that are not always understood. Though the Germans conquered France, the Luftwaffe losses in the Battle of France were catastrophic.
When the Germans attacked France they had more than 3000 operational aircraft (which helps explain their victory). When the Germans started the Battle of Britain a few months later, the Luftwaffe's operational strength was only half this, one of the reasons for their quick defeat
When the Germans lauched Barbarossa, they had only about 40% as many operational aircraft as when they attacked France--which helps explain one of the reasons for their failures in 1941. (the other reason was they still had a very large number of aircraft fighting the British)
Read 4 tweets
8 May
UK identity politics in a nutshell: Kirkcaldy and Hartlepool. Mirror images that show what has happened and the bind Labour is in. ImageImage
WHy these--because they are close to duplicates as one can find politically. Both are former industrial, small port areas (Kirkcaldy takes in Methil) that have suffered de-industrialization and are desperate need of levelling up. If you can find a better match let me know
Both were also extremely close politically until 2016. In 2012--solid Labour. Kirkcaldy voted Labour over SNP by 64-14 percent and Hartlepool voted Labour 43 and Conservative 28.
Read 6 tweets
13 Mar
For WWII Twitter, another nail in the coffin to the myth of the Battle of Prokhorovka and the overall importance of the Battle of Kursk campaign. Amazing how these myths have endured with no evidence to back them up. Thanks @DrBenWheatley
For the first time hard documentary evidence of German armor losses during the (mythical) battle of Prokhorovka. During the days that the battle occurred German armor losses in the units involved were tiny--just a handful of panzers.
Seems to be a loss rate commensurate to normal wear and tear more than an indication of no special engagement at all. (larger point--battles are generally overrated in understanding equipment losses in the war)
Read 6 tweets
26 Nov 20
A background to why I tweeted about Mincemeat. It starts from the fact that the invasion of Italy was not in the original plans for 1943. Coming out of Casablanca, the US and UK had agreed the following:
1) There would be no invasion of France in 1943
2) One mediterranean Island would be invaded (probably Sicily)
3) The CBO would get priority for air assets
4) The Battle of the Atlantic would be won
this is worth noting because the Allied leaders felt no need to approve an invasion of Italy to be seen to be active.
Read 7 tweets
26 Nov 20
Been thinking about WWII intelligence for next book on grand strategy. Have decided Operation Mincemeat is the best example of a intelligence ‘success’ that was actually a disaster
For those who don’t know, Mincemeat was the planting of intelligence to convince the Germans that the western allies were not going to invade Sicily: history.com/.amp/news/what…
The argument is that Mincemeat convinced the Germans to move some troops out of Sicily which made for an easier invasion. Celebrations all around!
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(