A. Yes.
Q. As far as communications and orders are concerned. And then during your raped advance in Russia there is a vacant region from a military point of view sometimes of a width of several kilometers?
A. Mostly two hundred to three hundred kilometers.
Q. And then gradually the occupation army follows?
A. And then comes the occupation army with all other facilities, Road building police measures, measures for the population, and with the population and all the that belongs to the occupation army.
Q. And where does, where do these SD. units belong?
A. They came together with the occupation army at the earliest date.
Q. And you yourself say that the official messages, the-
MR. FULKERSON: He testified this morning that he never heard of the SD in Russia. How can he answer this question as to when the SD came in?
THE WITNESS: I can only tell this from the data that are given here. I can see from these data a clear difference. I can see how many days are between the fighting troops and these reports by the SD. There isn't two weeks behind.
THE PRESIDENT: You might have saved your comment either for crossexamination or argument.
MR. FULKERSON: I beg your pardon.
Q. (By Dr. Von Stakelberg) And the communication of official messages needed days, you say?
A. For every courrier that the I/A received - the I/A is the most important man to the commander - the messengers for the fighting units needed usually eight days to get through this vacant space.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Well now, you described the plan of advance of the German Army. The fighting troops forge ahead as fast as they can, and then behind them is a vacum, an empty space sometimes two hundred kilometers.
A. Yes.
Q. And then eventually these comes the occupation army and the SD?
A. Yes, I said police measures for the occupation army.
Q. They come in together by they are far behind the fighting front. They are far behind the fighting troops?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, how do you suppose this happened? This is at Zhitomir on the 20th of August 1941, where the SD, that is the police, say that they liquidated 29 Communists and 5 secret agents assisted by a platoon of Waffen-SS. They must have caught up with the fighting troops.
A. No, your Honor, in this rear area, in the occupational area, there are the replacement units. They were called field replacement battalions. The with the SS and police basis there were also, I can only make conclusions from these documents.
Q. I see what you mean. The platoon of the Waffen-SS who assisted in the liquidation of those civilians was were taken from the replacement army, the field replacement army, the army of occupation?
A. I cannot say this with certainty, from where they came, your Honor.
Q. You think that is probable though?
A. Yes, that is what is says here, and I don't think there is anything incorrectly at this time.
Q. Oh, no, because this report went right up to the SD, the Police Chief. This went right in to Himmler's office, so it is probably right, don't you think.
A. Yes.
Q. You don't think the field officers of the SD and police would lie to Himmler? They probably told him the truth?
A. Even this I cannot judge, whether this was always the pure truth.
At the time we know too, that when prisoners were reported on this, or that combat action was reported, then so many dead were reported with the enemy. They were usually multiplied by two or three. They would nearly always exaggerate, and it will never by exactly right.
Q. Even to Himmler they exaggerated?
A. I never had to made any reports to Himmler.
BY DR. VON STAKELBERG:
Q. Witness, doesn't it seem strange to you that you read about these cruelties here and still didn't know anything about them?
A. This will not seem strange to me alone but to thousands of other soldiers who were at the front, and even to higher ranking officers.
Q. But you maintain that you didn't know anything about it?
A. Yes, in every respect.
Q. And as an explanation for this you give this vacant space?
A. I can't judge this, but I am convinced of the fact that this was not done so publicly in the village as it is described here. Very often, even there many secrecy precautions probably would have been taken.
DR. VON STAKELBERG: No further questions, your Honor.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: What was your rank during this campaign?
THE WITNESS: Obersturmbannfuehrer, Lieutenant Colonel.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Lieutenant Colonel?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q Now, you have just given us an interesting description of the advance through Russia. You have described that you had the combat troops, and then behind them was this vacuum, and then behind that something else went on. What happened when the German forces met with a temporary reverse, did this vacuum continue to exist?
A I didn't get the translation; I didn't got the sense of the statement.
Q All right, never mind that. When were you in Smela? Can you consult your battle calendar?
A One moment, I think I can tell you from memory, in the middle of August.
Q Now, yesterday I believe you described-
A 5th up to 8th of August.
Q Now, in Smela yesterday you described that you were cut off by the Russian break-through, is that correct?
A Yes, not cut off by the Russian break-through troop, but we had broken into the Russian front.
THE PRESIDENT: Your switch. We are not getting the English.
A Not by the Russian break-through troop, but we had broken through the Russian front, and thereby a cut-off Russian detachment was developed which then tried to make contact with the north from the south. And one Russian detachment broke through between the supply units and a combat regiment of our division.
Q And then you had to move the supply units back?
AAnd this territory was not secure. Our troops were too weak. Pardon, I must clarify this from the military view so that there won't be any mistake about it. Our troop units were too weak to secure this region for supply units. I personally had to withdraw the battalion by about fifteen to eighteen kilometers in order to make contact in the south with the neighboring combat division.
You will notice that all this took place in the combat territory. My advance route changed insofar as I didn't follow, I couldn't take my own road of advance but the one which was located somewhat further south, the road of the neighboring division. The Russians were north of us.
Q But at any rate you ordered the supply troops of the Viking Division to retreat temporarily?
A That was one occasion and a very well known incident in the Division because by this formation of a pocket two other Army divisions-
Q Now, just answer the question. You then did retreat on this incident from Smela back to Fodorke?
A Yes.
Q All right. When you went back then this vacuum you described was reduced considerably, was it not?
A Pardon me, but this is all fighting territory where we were. I don't know what you mean. The vacant space didn't-began only behind us. We were twenty kilometers from Gorodice. If I am asked from a military viewpoint, I must answer in that direction. I don't want things to be seen otherwise than they are, than they usually happen in military action. North of Gorodice the Russians were also present. As a result I had to go by way of south of Gorodice. There a neighboring division was fighting, and under the protection of this neighboring division I had to bring up the supply units which had been cut off.
Q Then you retreated to Fyodorki after you had gone backwards several kilometers, did you not?
A Yes.
Q Other combat troops -- Excuse me, other combat troops had already been in Fyodorki before you went back there, had they not?
A. Now, you have mentioned a new town.
Q No, Fyodorki.
A We were just in Smela and Gorodice.
A Then you said yesterday that you went back to Fyodorki.
A No, I went back from Smela to Gorodice and from Gorodice again to the east, to Fyodorke.
Q I am just reading from your testimony here. I have it right in front of me, and unless it was mistranslated, here is what you said, "In Smelat we were cut off for want of provisions by the Russian breakthrough, and I told a supply battalion to go back by Gorodice and stop once more somewhere. I forgot what village it was we went to through, Fyodorke."
A Yes, but you are still speaking of withdrawal, and this is withdrawing and advancing again, and you think this is all a withdrawal.
Q all right. Now, where did the withdrawal end?
A That is just the big mistake. Gorodice is located fifteen to eighteen kilometers back of Smela.
Q All right then, that is where you actually stopped, retreated.
THE WITNESS: Pardon no, your Honor. I can't explain this if I an continually interrupted.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
A Gorodice was a crossroad. I couldn't get through there. I had to go through this crossroad in order to get the southern road, and from the same level, fifteen to eighteen kilometers back, we advanced eighty, eighty kilometers eastward again. That is from Smela I withdrew fifteen kilometers, and to the south I advanced towards the east by eighty kilometers again.
Q (By Mr. Fulkerson) All right. Now then you retreated back to Gorodice. We are agreed on that much?
A Yes.
Q And that was behind Smela; that was west of Smela?
A We were not then in Smela. The Russians had broken through in Smela. We were anyway west of Smela.
Q That is right. Now, when you got back to Gorodice, than was a village or a town that had already been occupied by the German combat troops before, had it not?
A Yes, our own unit case through there, through Gorodice.
Q Now that is fine. Now, your unit had already passed through the village. Now, how long was it before some security measures were taken there after your troops had passed through? They just didn't walk through the village and leave everything alone, did they? Weren't some measures taken to control the civilian population to curb partisan activity in the village as you passed through?
A I told you already that we did not observe any guerrillas fighting at that time. We didn't even know anything about it.
Q So your version is that when you passed through one of these towns that there was no German personnel left there at all? Nothing but Ukrainians and Jews all happily living together?
A There were whole villages and towns where there weren't any German agencies or any German officer.
THE PRESIDENT: Shall we stop off at Scranton for lunch?
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 1345 hours.
(A recess was taken until 1345 hours, 28 August 1947).
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1400 hours, 28 August 1947) HEINZ FANSLAU - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION (continued)
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please. The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. FULKERSON: Your Honor, please, for the purpose of contradicting the testimony that was just heard here, we would like to put on a witness named Anton Goldstein, whom we just found out about during the noon hour. He was at Tarnopol at the time that these events took place. We won't put him on today, because actually we have only had a chance to talk to him about ten minutes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you are just giving notice, now?
MR. FULKERSON: Yes, that is right.
DR. STAKELBERG: Dr. von Stakelberg for the defendant Fanslau. Your Honor, at this time I would like to object to this witness, because according to the rules which apply here, that at the Tribunal a witness should not be allowed to be present in the courtroom before he testifies. This witness was amongst the spectators this morning.
MR. FULKERSON: Yes, Your Honor, he was, and during the noon hour he came up to us and identified himself, and said that he had been at Tarnopol when this happened.
THE PRESIDENT: I think the rule only prohibits a witness from being present after he is known to be a witness, after his name has been handed in, and notice given to the fact he is to testify. A man is not a witness until he is called.
DR. STAKELBERG: Your Honor, there is something so far as the rules are concerned which was taken from the German opinion, that a witness can not be present in a courtroom before his story. So far as I know that is not the case in the American Penal Code. In an American Penal Code a witness can be present in the courtroom and after that time they can still appear as a witness. According to the German opinion the code prohibits the presence, which is, in effect, for the reason that because the witness is not to gain a picture from what was going on in the courtroom so that he can shape his testimony in that direction.
This basic thought also applies, whether he has been here as a private person, or as a witness, and then he offers himself as a witness. After that he himself has offered to appear here as a witness on the basis of what he has heard in this courtroom.
MR. FULKERSON: If Your Honor please, such a rule makes no sense in the proceedings here, for we can get the todays transcript at the end of the day, and if it were the simple question of informing the witness of what happened, that could be done by seeing it in black and white what every one had said, and there is no difference between the hearing with his own ears, as this man did this morning.
PRESIDENT: Well, we will ref or to the rules and see what they say, and make a ruling on this later.
BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q You testified this morning that it took eight days for a courier to travel from the Army Headquarters to the Division Headquarters, is that right?
A Well, you can not put that in a general way. I said that it happened, but you can not say that in general. I merely talked about a courier from Berlin, not from the Army or the Army Corps. After all in the Army and the Corps; we had broadcasting facilities, as the distance was not very great between the corps and the headquarters in the army.
Q Then what I understand you to say this morning was, that it took a courier sometimes eight days to go from the Army Headquarters to the Divisional Headquarters, that was a misunderstanding, I misunderstood you, is that right?
A It was a misunderstanding, because there was rarely a courier in this case. We usually used wireless facilities, and only the combat agencies in the higher levels bad this broadcasting facility.
Q Let's go back to this vacuum that you described. Now throught this vacuum you had to transport all the ammunition, and all the food to the combat troops, is that true?
A That was taken care of by the socalled columns of the Organization Todt, of the transportation conveys, of the Army, or Army Corps. Up to that the combat units and the division had nothing to do with those transports.
Q Now, you testified, I believe, that sometimes the food office, or the supply troops of the Wiking Division were twenty or eighty kilometers behind the combat troops, isn't that true?
A Yes.
Q Now the food I take it, was hauled by trucks over that twenty or eighty kilometers?
A Over eight-hundred kilometers?
A Over the twenty to eighty kilometers?
A Yes. We would obtain the food whenever the food depots existed, be it of the army or the corps. At the food office the supplies were unloaded unto the individual trucks which belonged to the combat units. The combat battalions then we would get from the food office the supplies which were destined for the field kitchen.
Q And it was the job of the supply services to see to it that the food got from the bakery and the place where the meat was being dressed up to the combat regiments?
A Yes, this was done in the same form with all the sort of food as I have just explained just now.
Q And the -
A I beg your pardon, I would like to add something else. This was issued at the food office to the individual trucks which belonged to the combat battalions, and all the units which belonged to the division.
Q And the transportation of food from the bakery and the slaughter house up to the combat troops was your individual responsibility, was it not?
A Yes, Of course, we had to use the transport supply trucks of the fighting units.
Q This transportation was usually taken place in the area which had been recently, or fairly recently evacuated by the Russian or Red Army, is it not that true?
A Yes, the Red Army was in all localities which we occupied.
Q And the Red Army had the habit, had it not, or destroying the bridges and wreching the roads as much as it could?
A In Russia it was not possible to destroy the roads because the roads were hardly in existence.
Q Now the roads you testified about just now were frequently hard to get over. Now whose job was it to see that these roads were kept in repair so that the vehicles could go over them?
A In the combat unit no road work could be done. Whenever we hit a bad road up at the front, then we would try to make a new road thirty or forty meters next to it. It is quite impossible to consider European conditions here, with regard to conditions prevailing in Russia.
Q All right. Suppose you got a river where there was a bridge, and the bridge was destroyed, whose job was it to repair that?
A That was the task of the combat engineer battalion.
Q And if there was no combat engineer battalion nearby then, who did it?
A It never happened in combat that such combat engineer unit was never at hand. There was a combat corps engineers in every division. Every division has its own engineer column, which is only to build bridges.
Q And you mean to say that in a short distance of eighty kilometers it never happened that a bridge went out when there were no engineer troops in the neighborhood?
A Well, then the combat unit could not be on the other side of the bridge if the bridge was destroyed, because combat units had to build a new bridge anyway in order to be able to pursue the foe.
Q Bridges were never damaged by floods, or heavy traffic on the road?
A I have said often, if destroyed bridges were concerned which the Russians had destroyed after their evacuation, then our troops just had to build another bridge in order to pursue the enemy.
Q And you say that the civilian population was never used to repair roads and bridges in Russia?
A I don't know of a single case where that happened.
Q You never heard of it being done in the area where Viking division was?
A That is a question which I can not possibly answer. It can happen with an individual vehicle that wants to pass through a field road, and there is a very small bridge out, and probably the individual vehicle had to construct its own bridge.
Q You never heard of a civilian population being used by the Organization Todt for that purpose?
A Well, these were construction battalions. However, the construction battalions were not used with the combat units. That was the task of the re-echelon occupational army, the occupational units. That was the task of the local military government attachment. With all of those things the combat units did not have time to occupy themselves with.
Q But you were aware of the Organization Todt was using civilians and Jews particularly for these purposes, were you not?
A I can not judge that. I have just stated it may have happened in a re-echelon area, just as well as it probably could happen also to an American Army. I can not imagine it to be different than it would be in any military forces in Europe.
Q Do you know whether these civilians received any compensation for this work?
A It is very difficult for me to answer this question.
DR. STAKELBERG: Dr. von Stakelberg for the defendant Fanslau. Your Honor, I object to this question. Apparently the Prosecution now commences to introduce completely new questions to deal with in its cross examination. The question of compensation of this civilian population which was used for construction work has not been touched upon on direct examination.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a completely different subject matter.
MR. FULKERSON: I withdraw the question. That is all, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further cross examination by any defense counsel? The Marshal my remove the witness.
(Witness excused)
DR. PRIBILLA: Dr. Pribilla for the defendant Tschentscher. Your Honor, may I please the Tribunal, I now would like to begin my presentation of evidence by calling the defendant Tschentscher to the witness stand.
DR. STAKELBERG: Dr. Stakelberg for the defendant Fanslau. Mr. President, as further counter-proof of evidence in the rebuttal of the Prosecution, I have offered a number of witnesses. The witnesses whom I need most of all have not arrived as yet. The witnesses who are present here in the court proceedings, and whom I have also mentioned are concerned primarily with the defendant Tschentscher. My colleague, Dr. Pribilla, will examine them first on direct examination and I shall ask them questions in connection with that examination. It is my request that my colleague Pribilla, may begin his defense now, and after my witnesses have arrived we can examine these witness at that time.
Court No. II, Case No. IV.
ERWIN TSCHENTSCHER, defendant, recalled as a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Rebuttal) BY DR. PRIBILLA:
Q. Witness, when you appeared as a witness on your own behalf, you were put under oath. Now I want to point out to you that you are still under oath at this time. At what time were you a member of the SS-Division-Wiking?
A. I was a member of the Division-Wiking from the moment of its establishment, that was 1 December 1940, and I was a member of the Division until 31 December 1941. I actually left the Division in November 1941. At the end I was on leave, and I had to carry out another assignment.
Q. Therefore, from the 1 December 1940 until the end of November 1941, as it was 21 November 1941, practically speaking, what position did you occupy in the Division Wiking?
A. I was the company commander of the first company of the supply battalion, that was the food column.
Q. Do you know that two witnesses have alleged here that you had been the commander of the supply battalion, what do you say to that?
A. I can only confirm that Fanslau has stated before me. That according to the general custom in the German Wehrmacht, and also in the Waffen-SS, the commander of this battalion from the Divisional Administrative officer is the company commander of senior rank. I was first deputy, and I had been expressly sworn by him to that position.
Q. When the Division was about to be established, did you give any lectures at that time about the Jewish question, did you give any lectures there?
A. Yes, I did give orientation lectures. I gave factual lectures about the technical use of the supply units during combat operation.
This was a lecture which was directly connected with the training of the officers and the men. I gave this lecture in three parts. Then I also recall that on a special occasion I once addressed the entire battalion about the position of the SS-man, his attitude towards wife, his mother and his fiancee. Then in my company I only gave the so-called command training, about intelligence, about counter-intelligence questions, security, certain points of International Law with respect to the Red Cross, and the consequences of that, and then I would give them orientation about the ideological training, and here I used pamphlets of the high command of the Army which were prescribed for the entire Wehrmacht, and these were commentaries of the press which gave a certain general survey; they were printed and distributed, put on the bulletin board, and, perhaps, also read by the platoon leaders. I want to emphasize here, that special lectures about the Jewish question were not even discussed, and I certainly did not give any lectures on that myself, because the training period was so brief, which was available to us, that we had to limit ourselves to things which were of extreme importance for the troops.
Q. Why was the training period so brief? How long did it last?
A. On paper, the division was activated on 1 December 1940. That is to say, only some of the officers and noncommissioned officers were available at the time. The men, however, were assigned from the replacement units only toward the end of January and the month of February. However, even at the end of April we went to the basic training center, and here the military and technical training had to be completed within ten weeks.
Q. When you gave this orientation to your company, did you use your own thoughts there? Did you work out this material by yourself, or did you just repent what you had received in the pamphlets?
A. I just repeated the material that was contained in the pamphlets. If I can speak about my own mental work, then I discussed only the tactical used of the supply unit and the experiences which I had gained in the campaign in the West in 1940.
Q. Witness, you know that according to the chain of the witness Otto, and in part also of the Witness Sauer, even during the first days of the advance excesses are alleged to have occurred--and they were considerable excesses--toward Jews. Can you comment on that?
A. Things of that kind did not take place before my eyes, neither in my own unit nor in any other component of the army that was closely attached to us. I did not make any observations of that kind.
Q. Did your supply battalion, for example, occupy itself with the assembling of Jews and with having them deported?
A. No. A supply unit, if you are closely acquainted with it, is most unfit to carry out such actions. A combat unit, for example, does not constantly fight.
Sometimes there are days on which it rests absolutely or on which it is force to rest. However, food is supplied constantly, so that a supply unit actually does not have any spare time. Just to give you a short insight into what work had to be done by this supply unit, with a supply strength of about 25,000 men -because so-called corps units and emergency airfields were within our field-- every day 10,000 army loaves of bread were baked, and in the butcher company there was the capacity for killing 80 hogs or 40 steers, and sausage was made out of this meat.
Q. Excuse me. That was per day?
A. Yes, per day, and the food column every two to three days had to load and unload 80 to 120 tons of food with relatively little personnel, so that our personnel did not have any time to carry out any other acts.
I can recall here a somewhat strange suggestion which the divisional commander Steiner made at the time. Steiner was a real soldier, and he wanted that the supply battalion also should have some military training, that they should be not only bakers and butchers. On one occasion he made the suggestion to me that, for example, the baker company, which consisted of young, strong men, should be relieved of its work for two weeks and go into combat. I only laughed very briefly at the moment, and I said, "Yes, but please give me the 7th Company of the 2nd Regiment for that time so they can bake bread." Steiner saw that his plan was impossible and this settled the entire suggestion.
Q. In your companies, the baker company and the butcher company, were any Jews employed by these units during the advance?
A. Aside from the fact of whether they were Jews or not, the use of foreign elements, especially in food depots where food had to be handled and especially in areas where epidemics were so prevalent as is usually the case in Eastern Europe, was impossible.
Therefore, if any working detachments should have been formed from indigenous personnel there, only very small detachments could have been concerned here. Of course, occasionally, at certain places where combat operations had taken place a short time before, some small clearing up work had to be done, where rubble and debris had to be removed, and I know from my own experiences that on two occasions I saw two detachments of that kind with one of our units. However, I want to emphasize here that these were Russians prisoners of war. They were wearing military uniforms.
Q. You exclude the possibility that the baker company or the butcher company used Jews in work detachments?
A. This never existed as a normal condition. I want to say that it might have happened, that occasionally a small detachment was used by a local military government detachment or a mayor so that they could clean up the rubble and debris. However, a combat unit always can demand that such work be carried out through the civilian authorities, and among these civilians Jews may perhaps have been used to some extent. However, I have never recognized the principle that particularly Jews were selected for that purpose.
Q. However, they were not used in the baker and butcher platoon?
A. No, not in our baker and butcher services at all.
Q. During the time you spent at the front, did you see any mass executions of Jews, or did you hear anything about them, or did you yourself make any observations about them?
A. No. After we had passed through the area of Tarnopol, I heard by way of conversation that within the population of Poland which had been evacuated by the Russians riots had occurred.
I heard that this was the result of the murders which had been committed by the Russians when they killed Nationalist Poles, Ukrainians and National Germans who were hostages whom they had arrested before. These riots were allegedly directed against members of the Communist party, the party followers. I know only from hearsay after we had passed through the area of Tarnopol that among the people who had been murdered, who had been discovered in the so-called GPU building, there was also a number of German prisoners of war who had been murdered. They were members of the army, and some of them were members of the Luftwaffe. I further heard in this connection that the story was prevalent that a first sergeant had recognized members of his division among the dead and that he was sentenced to death by a military courtmartial of his division because he himself had tried to get justice.
Generally, I would like to say that when we passed through the cities -- after all, we only passed through them -- Lemberg, Tarnopol -- we saw that the population there was extremely excited. I made similar observations as Fanslau has described them, and I also know the big prison building. It was surrounded by a large crowd of people, and certain riots occurred, and the German military police were trying to keep the roads clear and to keep these people who were demonstrating in check. That is what I was able to observe for the few minutes that I passed by on that road. After all, we did not stop there. Otherwise, we were located in cities only very rarely. I know only of Shitomir, where components of our battalion were quartered, and all three units were located at Biala-Zierkew and at Novo Voskowsk, which was on the other side of the Dnieper River.
Q. Did you or one of your units have anything to do with the exhumation of the corpses from mass graves?
A. We certainly did not have anything to do with the exhumation of bodies. In the troop assembly units, where comrades who had died in battle were taken, we had so-called grave registration detachments, and I believe that such units also existed with the headquarters in the read echelons, and their task was to bury corpses and also carcasses of animals. May I please ask you to answer the question yourself, where in the world a food handling agency had to deal with the burying of corpses? After all, this would not be hygienic, in any case.
Q. I want to sum up your answer. With all the incidents which you observed, you and your company or your battalion had nothing to do. You had no contact with these things?
A. No.
Q. The witness Otto has described an incident here which is alleged to have taken place at a bridge at Zlotzow. Will you please comment on his description?
A. As far as I know, only the First Company was located here--which was the food office. The two other companies had already gone on ahead, as was frequently caused by the supply situation. I can still recall that I passed through Zlotzow with my company in the early morning hours, and in the city, which I can not remember anymore otherwise, there were fires burning at various places. That is the only thing which I cam still remember faintly. The city must have been evacuated by the enemy only a short time before. I can not remember a bridge there at all. It was not the case that we were advancing on our own, but we were preceding in an endless column which followed the leading divisions; we were reserve combat units and supply units of all the different divisions which followed their divisions which were engaged in combat further up ahead.