HMS HAWKE

[Felix C]

Points to consider:

 

1. Lowell Thomas was not above coloring an account for his audience.

2. Visibility is limited through a periscope. Especially in any kind of seaway. Low lying objects are easily hidden. 

3. Early war newspaper accounts tend to be accurate. Censorship had not yet taken hold regarding naval incidents. Accounts of  what occurred on the ship at the time would carry much weight in my estimation rather than a Ger. acct due to #2 above. 

4. The Ger. saw one boat and unspecified rafts. as below and Spiess. If I am not mistaken one survivor newspaper account indicates a boat was launched and then dragged under. I maybe in error as I have not looked at Hawke in a while and have looked at many sinkings  since, so my head is full of eyewitness accounts. 

 

Here is from U9's war diary:

15 Okt. 1914 Nordsee
5:30 Vm. Vor einem abgeblendeten Fahrzeug, 1500 ? abgetaucht.
6:20 Vm. Als feindl. Fahrzeug mit 2 Schornsteinen ausgemacht,
welches mit unregelmäßigen Kursen u. Fahrten
lief u. fortgesetzt mit passierenden Handelsdampfern
in Signalverkehr trat.
8:30 Vm. Vorübergend in weiter Entfernung ein zweiter Kreuzer
gleichen Typs in Sicht. Im Laufe des Vormittags
wiederholt vergeblich versucht zu Schuß zu kommen.
Zeitweilig kamen die Kreuzer ganz aus Sicht.
11:15 Vm. Wieder 2 u. noch ein dritter Kreuzer gleichen Typs
in Sicht, die zu sammele schienen, Angriff energisch
auf den einen Kreuzer, der sich mit viel Fahrt
u. Zickzackkursen von den andern loslöste, angesetzt.
Schuß aus II Rohr unter schießteknisch schwierigen
Verhältnissen, da der Kreuzer kurz vor dem Schuß
noch einmal um etwa 4 Strich Kurs geändert hatte.
Treffer. Beim ersten Zeigen des Sehrohres nach dem
11:53 Vm. Schuß - nach Verlauf von 8. Min. - war das Schiff
bereits gesunken. Die Schiffbrächigen, die einen
Kutter u. Planken besetzt hielten, wurden wie es
schien, gegen 3 Uhr von einem Dampfer aufgenommen
der in die Wege geleitete Angriff auf die beiden
anderen Kreuzer mußte aufgegeben werden,
da sie mit höchster Fahrt abliefen. 

 

One cutter and 'planken' (to me rafts)

Edited 31 January , 2018 by Felix C

[Liz in Eastbourne]

Many thanks, Felix. 

Yes, I knew Lowell Thomas was likely to have embellished the account, and your points re contemporary newspaper accounts  vs reports from a submarine make good sense too.  I had noticed a number of uncritical quotations from the Lowell book, usually without attribution, which was why it seemed worth mentioning  the source.

As I've noted above the newspaper reports are not without inconsistencies as regards the rafts. Yes, there was a reference to a  boat being launched and then dragged under.

I'll have to get assistance with the German, mine being inadequate. I get Zickzackcursen, though, despite never having encountered the word...

 

Liz

Edited 31 January , 2018 by Liz in Eastbourne

[Felix C]

I apologize the telling line is "., die einen Kutter u. Planken ...." = one cutter and rafts. Which to me aligns with the survivor reports of one boat and rafts. Spiess mentions one boat and omits the rafts,  besides the reasons above,  I think because in his book he immediately follows with a description of the demeanor of a visible officer in the dory/cutter. Whether or not rafts were launched is immaterial in his account as that was not the purpose of his narrative. He also mentions seeing ten men jump off the last visible bit of Hawke as it slides under the waves. A  very particular view of events intended to convey a striking image upon the reader. Both images make the British adversaries appear as devoted naval mariners. A thread which runs through his entire book. (He was not writing from memory as he mentions in the introduction having his papers/documents/diaries from the events)

 

I have one, two, maybe three Hawke related ADMs. I can send them to you if interested and do not already have them(research purposes only). I think it is allowed. Do not want the PRO placing me on a Wanted List. Folks here have done much for me in the distant and recent past. Always nice to pay it forward.

 

 

Edited 1 February , 2018 by Felix C

[Liz in Eastbourne]

Thank you again, Felix - that's really useful.  And I'm grateful to be the onward beneficiary of your return of help that others here have given you.

 

It doesn't matter in fact whether the cutter was the same thing as the mail dory except re timing.  As you say, that there was only one boat from which survivors were rescued is undisputed.  I am just writing a short account of a boy who was on a raft (which was evidently not the raft from which Rosoman was eventually rescued) and then, like most of them on that raft,  let go and drowned, and want to create a clear (as far as possible) picture of what happened.

I'll pm you.

 

Liz