Human Costs of World War

Human costs of World War II

World War Two: causality statistics

Methodological problems

There are certain problems in the accumulation and assessment of data on the Second World War that have to be taken into account before an assessment is made as to the correct casualty statistics. As many researchers point out, ascertaining the actual death statistics during the war is a very difficult task as there are various views and assessments of the figures. The most reliable documentation is often the most recent; however some of the most recent online sources do not provide adequate reference to their sources.

The Internet does provide the most up-to-date figures and statistics on this subject. However, one has to take into account whether these figures are reliable and have significant source docs to verify their reliability.

Another method that can be used to authenticate the validity of data is through peer review sites. These sites are relatively reliable as they have been reviewed by researchers and other experts.

The research method that was used in this paper was to collect as much online and offline data as possible and then to search for agreement and disparities in the figures. On this basis the site or the resource with the best average data and with the best source docs was deemed to present the most reliable casualty figures.

2. Statistics

The following Web site, secondworldwar.co.za, (Table 1) presented the best average figures and supplied adequate source information.

Another reason for choosing this site as the most accurate resource was that is has been recently updated and is also a well-known site which is open to peer review and comment.

Country

Military

Civilian

Soviet Union*

China

Germany

Poland

Japan

Yugoslavia

Rumania*

France*

Hungary*

Austria

Greece*

Italy

Czechoslovakia

Great Britain

USA

Holland

Belgium

Finland

Canada

India

Australia

Spain**

Bulgaria

New Zealand

South Africa

Norway

Denmark

Total circa 61 Million

Source: (Stokes, P.)

As the author of the above site states "... An accurate figure is difficult to calculate." (ibid) the difference between World War II figures becomes evident when other charts and tables are examined.

See Addendum)

Research into the different sources of war casualties made it evident that while there were many agreements in the figures, there were also many significant differences. This is certainly the case as many reviewers note that there are obvious disparities in the figures. It was also noted in the research that some countries, when presenting their data, seemed to be biased in revealing the number of casualties during the war.

An example of these disparities is the data from another set of international data from a reputable site but which showed some differences to chart one. (See Addendum for Table 2)

This source presents a different overall casualty figure of 56,125,262. However, when compared to table one, and bearing in mind the difficulty in ascertaining absolute figures, then this table may not seem overly incorrect. However, the main disparities seem to be in the areas where there are the highest numbers of deaths, such as the U.S.S.R. This disparity may also have political and national biases. The figure for the U.S.S.R. In the first table is 25,568,000; while it is 21,300,000 in table no 2.

Offline sources also present a different view of some of the higher figures. This is particularly the case when it comes to books that deal specifically with individual countries. One would assume that sources which focus on a single country would be more accurate; however this does not seem to be the case largely due to the fact that online resources can refer to the latest research and data. An example of a source which offers solid and specific offline documentation for its data is World War II in Ukraine by a. Gregorovich.

The total USSR military loss in World War II was 8,668,400 including Ukraine, Byelorussia, Russia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Armenia, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan, etc. according to General M. Moiseyev, Chief of General Staff, USSR Armed forces (Voennoistoricheskiy zhurnal no. 3, March 1990; quoted by Peter G. Tsouras in the Great Patriotic War, p. 240. (Gregorovich a.)

Note that the figure given in the above source corresponds with the figure of Russian military dead in Table one, which further adds validity to that table.

With regard to Germany, there are a number of disparate figures and tables. The figures given from intensive research of actual wartime and administrative documents are as follows:

Total Wehrmacht Losses, September 1, 1939-January 31, 1945: Eastern Front 1,105,987

Scandinavia 16,639 - Southwest 50,481 Southeast 19,235 - West 107,042 - Navy 48,904 - Air Forces 138,596. Total Wehrmacht 1,810,061 in the West Since D-Day (June 6, 1944), German Armed Forces Lost: Army 66,321 Air Force 11,066 Additional Total Deaths 2,001,399.

Using these monthly rates, the total Wehrmacht toll reached 2,150,000, of which 1,960,000 were killed in action.

Sorge 62)

The following extract shows the detailed way in which this information was gathered.

The German army, all through the war, maintained a monthly report of estimates of personnel and materiel. This report was compiled by the Wehrmacht historian, Major Percy Schramm, at army headquarters from data submitted by the various components of the major service branches and marked "Secret Command Matter." After 1944, copies were issued on a strict need-to-know basis and very few officers were privy to its contents. Since the account for April 1945 no longer reached Wehrmacht headquarters due to the destruction in Berlin and the severed communication links, the statistics cited are taken from the March 14, 1945, report. It had a closing date of January 31 and represents the final, officially prepared manpower picture of the Wehrmacht (Historical Division, 1945- 1952, 1).

Sorge 61)

Assessment

Making a final and definitive assessment of the casualties during World War II is an impossibility given the complexity of the task and with the limited information at hand. One would have to undertake intensive research which would include calculating the distinctions and similarities between the figures; as well as a thorough evaluation of their sources. From the information that can be gleaned from the Internet as well as offline sources, it seems that Table 1 above is probably the most correct as it many of the other tables and lists available and also has credible source information.

Bibliography www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24355091

Chambers, John Whiteclay and David Culbert, eds. World War II, Film, and History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24132278

Divine, Robert a., ed. Causes and Consequences of World War II. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1969.

Gregorovich a.

World War II in Ukraine. Accessed November 15, 2004. http://www.infoukes.com/history/ww2/page-29.html www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=37750012