Animal Bombs

 

The history of war is the history of suffering, death and destruction. During the Second World War this destruction was certainly not restricted to mankind. Of course animals became casualties of war through indirect means, such as bombing, hunger and exposure. However in WW2 many combating nations sought to use animals in order to bring destruction to their enemy. This post will highlight how dogs and bats were weaponised for war.

 

Dogs are one of the most loyal and beloved animals within many nations, however during WW2 it was decided that man’s best friend could make a useful weapon. 1941 marked the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of the USSR, which threw the Red Army and the Russian nation into retreat and destruction. In an attempt to combat the German tanks the Red Army decided that dogs would be an effective means of delivering an explosive device. Training dogs to do this was, in theory, not particularly difficult. The handlers would let the dogs go hungry and when suitable famished, would place food under a tank. The idea was that before a battle the dogs would be brought to the front hungry so that when they were released they would scurry under the German tanks in the hope of finding food. In order to destroy the tanks the dogs would be fitted with a back pack, filled with explosives and armed with a lever that would of course be activated when under the tank, destroying both the tank and the dog. Ironically in practice the plan didn’t entirely work as intended. The dogs had been trained with Soviet tanks so unsurprisingly when released in battle, many went under the Soviet tanks thus destroying them! Although not as success as intended, the Russia anti-tank dog demonstrated the creative and utilitarian ideas deployed by the Red Army during their Great Patriotic War as they attempted to stave off destruction and defeat.

 

As war in the Pacific and Asia theatre dragged on the American Government continued to explore way in which they could gain an upper hand over their Japanese enemy. Japanese cities were identified as being predominately constructed from wood and so ideas began to emerge around how these cities could be destroyed, of course the most effective tool to do this was fire. The problem that they faced was how to deliver this fire to the enemy. Of course bomber air craft could deliver incendiary bombs however these were inaccurate and could be costly in materials and in aircraft if the Japanese put up an effective defence. One of the ideas that emerged was that of the bat bomb. It was identified that during the day bats hide in caves or other dark areas. An idea emerged that if bats could be released over Japanese cities during the daylight they would soon fly down and find dark hiding places within the roofs and crevices of houses, warehouses and factories. In terms of the incendiary a small devise was attached to the bat using surgical string and would detonate through a time delay fuse, thus setting the cities alight in a surprising instance. It was planned that the bats would be refrigerated to make them go into an early hibernation, loaded into special built bombs and dropped over a Japanese city. As the bomb fell a parachute would open and as it slowly dropped to the floor different levels where the bats were stored would open up and with the increasing hot air surrounding them the bats would awake and fly away to find dark cover. In early tests there were some successes, even if in one incident the bats were dropped too early from the aircraft and set fire to US military buildings, the bat bomb was demonstrated it could work. The small bat bombers however were not deployed on Japanese cities as by the time it was ready to be used its destructive power was miniscule compared the US government preferred solution to ending the war, that of the nuclear bombs.

 

Images taken from:

Diana C Cooper, ‘Anti-Tank Dogs: Sent on Suicide Missions’, Famous Dogs In History, < http://dogs-in-history.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/anti-tank-dogs-sent-on-suicide-missions.html&gt;

 

Further information:

Diana C Cooper, ‘Anti-Tank Dogs: Sent on Suicide Missions’, Famous Dogs In History, < http://dogs-in-history.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/anti-tank-dogs-sent-on-suicide-missions.html&gt;

 

Jilly Cooper, Animals in War (London: Corgi Books, 1984)

 

Robert F. Dorr, ‘Brilliant Mistakes: The Bat Bomb’, Defence Media Network, < http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/brilliant-mistakes-the-bat-bomb/&gt;

Animal Bombs

The Monarchs Behind

The history of monarchies across the globe is peppered by conflict, opulence and political intrigue. Throughout their reigns monarchs have controlled the prospects of their courtiers and the fashion of their time. Usual monarchs influenced the zeitgeist by giving patron to certain artist or introduction new fashions and food, however this post will show how some monarchs influenced their times through their own bottom.

Louis XIV, known as the Sun King, ruled France from 1643 until his death in 1715 reigning for an astonishing 72 years. Louis led France into an absolutist monarchy in which he was the supreme authority in the land answerable to no person but God.  This demigod, who’s reign was ordained by God himself still suffered from worldly illness. When Louis was a child he suffered from small pox, a common disease, and other ailments such as measles, colds and gout. At the age of 47 Louis began to experience pain and after a period of increasing pain it was found the King had a fistula. A fistula is a small tunnel that develops between the end of the bowel and the skin near the anus. The pain grew meaning Louis could no longer sit or walk very far, unknown to most of his courtiers. Eventually Charles- Francois Tassy a barber surgeon decided that the fistula should be cut, a dangerous operation especially with the threat of infection. After a period of practice on animals and reluctant prisoners, Tassy performed the procedure under no anaesthetics on the King using homemade implements. (See images)

The king survived the procedure and by three months was back to riding around Versailles. Bizarrely, having a fistula and having the royal operation became extremely fashionable in the French court, whether people had one or not. Some courtiers even took to wearing bandages around their rear, just like the King. Charles Francois Tassy was the new star at court, presented with gifts of land and money from the king but also most importantly raising the profile of physicians and the position throughout France.

Royal Patronage was always crucial for members of court to rise in the world either with greater titles, responsibilities or more alluring positions. Henry VIII is possible one of England’s greatest known monarchs, especially for his love life which culminated in having six wives. Henry did however create a royal position that offered a large amount of one on one time with the king which could mean a gentleman could gain the kings trust and put his personal interests directly to the monarch. The Groom of the Kings Close Stool, shortened to Groom of the Stoll was a position where the King appointed a man to monitor his meals and organise the necessities around his predicted bowl movements.  The Groom of the stool would also be responsible with helping the monarch undress so that they could relieve themselves and ensure that there was water, towels and a wash bowl for the monarchs use. It is commonly believed that the Groom would clean the Royal behind, however there is no evidence for this.

Ultimately the position of the Groom of the Stool was a much sought after position due to high salary but more for its personal contact with the king. A Groom of the Stool under King George III, John Stuart, went on to be Prime Minister under the patronage of his king. Incredibly the position continued until 1901 when Edward VII abolished the position. Ultimately for nearly 400 years, it paid to be close to the monarch’s toilet.

Images- The implements used to cut Louis XIV fistula.

Images taken from, Garry Littman, ‘The Royal fistula that changed the face of surgery’, Bilman, <http://www.bilan.ch/garry-littman/english-room/royal-fistula-changed-face-surgery&gt;

Sources

AuroraVonG, ‘The Royal Fistula’, Party Like 1660, <http://partylike1660.com/the-royal-fistula/&gt;

Ben Johnson, ‘Groom of the Stool’, HISTORIC UK, <http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Groom-of-the-Stool/&gt;

The Monarchs Behind