Thanks for your great articles of PAST GREAT AMERICANS ! Sgt York is
and always was one of my most favorite stories for over 62 years, at the movies & STILL IS! Many times I wished I could have visited
Alvin Yorks victory scene. ( My wife
& I spent 2 days in PELL MELL meeting
and talking with A. Yorks son, sister & cousins for hours! I ONLY
can wish I could go back. Thank you

By joe bernabo on Jun 16, 2008 at 7:56 am

ok.im realated to alvin c. york
im his great etc. niece and im so proud of him and that is amazin that he mad world history! and if u need anything on his any history call me 1-813-401-5133

By sierra york on Jul 24, 2008 at 10:53 am

This is a fascinating report.
Thank you!
Dankeschön!

By Paul on Aug 18, 2008 at 12:33 pm

SGT ALVIN YORK WAS THE DEINITION OF A GREAT AMERICAN!!!!!!!
Not a paper tiger, like Sean Hannity….

By Dan Scherschel on Sep 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm

ummm yea this is cool i guess…. nice article

By sammi on Oct 22, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Read both yours (LTC Mastriano’s) accounts/papers, and DR.
Nolan’s. I feel you uncovered the correct position where York
fought.

You need to re-work your paper for the unenlightened ones of the
Nolan Team. Map references and the step-by-step courses of
action as well. A veteran understands your terms (I am Vietnam-
1971 w/20 years in the Army). A layman does not . The paper
needs to be simple, sequential, and flowing.

The Nolan Team makes many presumptions. The graves
locations of the G Company KIA are wrong and they (Nolan’s
party) admit it. Find the sites where those meen were exhumed
from and it’s icing on your cake. The former graves are the key.
There is ALWAYS evidence of human remains.

I wish you well on your next Combat Tour.

A 5th Mech Veteran
(3500 Mechanized troops vs 40,000 NVA-1971)

By RAYMOND E. DROZD on Nov 8, 2008 at 5:13 pm

Excellent historical narrative about the most decorated American soldier of WWI and a true hero.

I was privileged to serve under LTC Mastriano. “Locked, cocked, ready to rock–Alpha!”

By SGT Walla on Dec 31, 2008 at 1:24 am

Iama retired Air Force officer, and was stationed at Ramstein AB, Germany, 1994-97. On a family vacation in 1995 to Camp Darby, Italy, we passed a rainy afternoon in our cabin watching a video of ‘Sgt York’ one of my favorite movies ever. My kids, young as they were, were entranced by the story. We bought the tape, and spent the next two years looking in the brushy, hilly country of eastern France for ‘Mont York’…but were never successful. I have since read that France has built a trail system and memorial which was dedicated this past year.

We still have the tape. Last year my son brought it in to his high school history class, and the students were fascinated by this quintessentially American story of which most of them – even in ultra-conservative Colorado Springs – had never heard.

By AK on Jan 25, 2009 at 1:52 pm

My question to Mr. Mastriano is why he does not even mention the letters and maps provided to the Army War College by York’s former commanders, Major Buxton and Captain Danforth, that give exact details and location of where this fight took place.

My first guess is that he will not mention this because Mr. Matriano’s location is wrong.

If his research in the German archives was so detailed why was he not able to find the file of Lt. Thoma which contains a handrwitten statement by Thoma taken in 1919 describing the circumstances of his capture.

And, as much as Mr. Mastriano talks about the German soldiers, particularly Lt. Endris, why did he not take the time to locate his grave? It is only a few km from Chatel Chehery.

Speaking of graves. Why did he not even mention the American Graves Registration forms that give accurate coordinates to the burials? True, the initial records taken in October 1918 are inaccurate, but this was corrected by the G.R.S. when the bodies were exhumed and relocated to the Meuse-Argonne Cemetery.

And, the photographs taken in 1919 of the graves. What does the terrain at Mr. Mastriano’s site not even come close to the terrain seen in the 1919 photos?

It is quiet clear from statements made by York himself, Major Buxton and a soldier captured by York that this event took place in a “Ravine” and not on an open slope where the Mastriano site is. This open slope also just happened to be the center of the main attack of 328ht Infantry which makes it impossible for the York fight to have occurred there. Look at the History of the Three Hundred and Twenty Eighth Regiment of Infantry at the map detailing the attack. ALL of the US accounts agree that the 328th attack was directed slightly to the northwest directly at Mr. Mastriano’s location. ALL of the US accounts agree that the fight took place on the hill located DIRECTLY southwest of Hill 223. Mr. Mastriano for some reason fails to address any of these very important documents and simply says the others are wrong.

Ask him to provide original and translated copies of the German archival material that he claims give the secret information that support his claim. I do not think he can provide that. It certainly will not look like the official translated copies I have read that were translated by an official German court appointed translator.

Why is this important? Because it looks like an intentional distortion of history has occurred here and that needs to be corrected.

If you really read Mr. Mastriano’s report there is nothing in there detailing anything found in the archives that really shed any light on what he claims. His maps are confusing and hard to understand since this was written for a military audience and not the public, who he has so easily deceived.

And what of the other sixteen members of the patrol? It is sad that Mr. Mastriano does not even mention them. History, this is not history. It is one man making a name for himself by exploiting SGT York and the other members of the patrol by making up the story to fit the location of the reported 21 shell casings he found. I do not call these casings “hard evidence” but it is the only thing he has going for his side.

Look at the 82nd Division History and the 328th History, these two books alone make it clear where this fight took place

By SGT Hulka on Apr 27, 2009 at 6:26 am

Has anyone seen the last issue of the Dutch magazine “Wereld In Oorlog, Nr. 11, 2009″ (The World at War, issue number 11, 2009)? There is a very interesting article about this very debate found starting on page 7.

Through a Dutch friend of mine I was able to understand the following key points from this article;

1.) From the author’s interviews with Dr. Clarke, the Director of the U.S. Army Center of Military History (CMH), Dr. Clarke stated that he issued the famed “SYDE – CMH endorsement letter” not as support for the findings of Mr. Mastriano’s, but rather to say that the CMH was a supporter of his research – not the results. This letter was written at the request of Mr. Mastriano who thought he could obtain French sponsorship with this letter for what he planned to do.

2.) French Sponsorship; well it looks like from this article that the French regional archaeologist for the Champagne-Ardennes Region did not issue a permit for or otherwise authorize Mr. Mastriano’s relic hunting activities and therefore it appears that Mr. Mastriano’s relic hunting could be considered an illegally activity flagrantly violating French cultural and archaeological law. I am sure the same applies for the French cultural artifacts, which were presumably illegally exported at US tax payer’s expense to the CMH aboard a US Air force C-17. I am sure there is a lot more to follow of this aspect of the story. Mainly concerning why the artifacts will be displayed in the Pentagon when in reality these “artifacts” were more than likely illegally excavated, illegally exported from France and worst of all, are artifacts that have nothing whatsoever to do with the specific engagement of SGT. York, the patrol or the German units involved that resulted in the capture of 132 German prisoners of war.

3.) The famed French Military letter of endorsement appears to be nothing more than an internal memo discussing the creation of the “York Trail” and has absolutely nothing to with endorsing anything Mr. Mastriano claims.
Also, from the way I read this article, a least one member of Mr. Mastriano’s team, who was assisting Mastriano in digging artifacts after his final report had been issued, disagrees with Mr. Mastriano’s methods and findings. I have a question; why did the SYDE continue to relic hunt for artifacts after their 100% certainty repot had been issued? I wonder; are all of the artifacts shown in the photos above really from the SYDE “York Spot”, or are they from anywhere in that region? I do not see any method of marking or identifying any of the individual artifacts shown in these photos as I would expect and have seen in other archaeological reports. Does that mean that there is no “real” provenance for these artifacts? Does that mean that they were found only where Mr. Matriano says they were found?

At any rate, I cannot wait to see how this turns out, but from the way this latest article reads, it looks like some of Mr. Mastriano’s core supporters are starting to run for cover or back step on previous “endorsements”.

I again encourage everyone to examine the documents I have so often mentioned in great detail and in previous entries in this blog that Mr. Mastriano and his followers refuse to acknowledge.
This debate is far from over, only warming up…… so to speak.

By SGT Hulka on May 3, 2009 at 7:22 pm

There has been another “discovery” that needs to be discussed here.

Please take a look at this article:
http://rss.ireport.com/docs/DOC-258231

Initially I thought this must be some kind of a joke, but after a little more searching I found the original army press release:
http://www.1ad.army.mil/Story/may09/german_soldier.htm

A short time later I received this email written by this man and here are a few excerpts:

“From: Douglas Mastriano
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 6:39 AM
Subject: Important SGT York discoveries from October 1918?

“Two amazing discoveries to support the York Spot:”

“We are pleased to announce the recovery of a significant discovery of artifacts related to where Sergeant York accomplished his amazing feat.
So what?”

“1. The discoveries confirm our conclusions as to where York fought on 8 OCT 1918
2. York did what he was awarded the Medal of Honor for (silencing the detractors)
3. One God-fearing man made the difference – an example of us today
4. This important piece of American History is preserved for the next generation”

“While working on the Sergeant York Historic Trail, we uncovered the personal effects and the complete identification tag of a German soldier involved in the fight against York’s battalion on 8 October 1918. The soldier of whom we speak is Gunner Wilhelm Härer.”

“On 8 October 1918, Wilhelm Härer was assigned to German Lieutenant Paul Lipp’s portion of Humserberg. Lipp commanded the machine gun which Alvin York assaulted and destroyed. Lipp himself was captured by York. As a result of York’s actions, Wilhelm Härer’s gun crew fell back under heavy US pressure. As they withdrew, Wilhelm Härer fell in battle. He was declared missing in action.”

“The discovery is the strongest undisputable piece evidence directly linking a specific soldier with the York spot. This is significant in that the detractors can explain away buttons, and collar disks – which hundreds of soldiers carried. However, the recovery of Wilhelm’s ID tag is harder to ignore and adds further confirmation of our work and conclusions as to where York earned the Medal of Honor. This discovery was followed by the recovery of two badly damaged US military tunics of soldiers from York’s BN – again, complimenting our earlier findings regarding the York spot.”

After reading the article and this email I was not only disturbed, but equally surprised and amused by what this man now claims. Here are my thoughts on this “discovery”:

1.)Since when do Boy Scouts do archaeology? Especially on a World War One battlefield? It is documented that not only high explosive was used in the valley west of Chatel Chehery on this day, but Phosgene gas as well. Being that approximately 20% or more of first world war artillery shells did not explode I am not sure if this is appropriate “work” for Boy Scouts tromping around the woods with metal detectors and shovels.

2.)Would the French regional director of archaeology issue a permit to Boy Scouts to conduct surface metal detector archaeology? I doubt it and I bet his remarks about this discovery will be VERY exciting. Does the Center of Military History and other supporters of this man know that not only were these artifacts illegally excavated and exported from France, but the archaeology was done by Boy Scouts? They can answer for themselves when the time comes.

3.)Now to the disturbing part; if what this man is saying is true then they found the grave of a German soldier who is still listed as missing since October 1918. I can see that a small case of artifacts were “repatriated” to the town where this soldier came from, but no mention of his remains. Instead of doing the correct thing; which would be immediately cease all excavation as soon as a suspected burial is located, notifying the local mayor’s office, the Gendarmamarie and the regional archaeologists’ office the Boy Scouts continued to “loot” as many artifacts as they could find. (The thought of Boy Scouts conducting serious archaeology paints a very comical and humorous picture in my mind, but one cannot overlook the very serious cultural, ethical and morale violations that have apparently occurred as a result of this “discovery”.)

In my opinion, if the truth were known, they probably only found the dog tag and the other items were found on the same hill so they simply grouped them together to make the story more “sensational”. But, we must give them the benefit of doubt since they presented a case of artifacts that seem to contain the dog tag, a gas mask, what looks like a soldiers boot heel with the leather still on it, buttons and other artifacts. Again I would ask; where are the remains of this soldier? Even if they “thought” or “felt like” he might have been removed and transferred to a military cemetery after the war they are nevertheless obligated to turn the excavation work over to professional archaeologists. If even a finger bone had been found that would be enough to say this soldier has been “found”, but what apparently has happened is the artifacts were “looted” and this soldier still remains in a “missing” status. I do not think that the findings, opinions or conclusion of Boy Scout archaeology can be taken very seriously and they are not qualified for excavating a missing soldier’s presumed final or temporary resting place. But, without having the proper authorization to begin with it would be self incriminating to inform the same agencies that would have arrested them had the known what they were doing in the first place. Better to get out of France with the “loot” as quickly as possible and make the announcement on a local level, become a hero for a small German town and continue to dazzle an evidently very naïve Center of Military History.)

4.)Ok, so we have a dog tag from a soldier that belonged to the 125th Landwehr Infantry, what does that have to do with confirming the “York Spot”. This tag was found exactly where it should be, on the hill the 125th occupied during the battle.

This man says: “The discovery is the strongest undisputable piece evidence directly linking a specific soldier with the York spot.”

I thought they said earlier that the 21 pistol cartridges were the most undisputable evidence linking a specific soldier to the York Spot, and in this case SGT York himself, at least according to this man’s claims.

5.)Again we see that this man says that the 125th Landwehr was on the Humserberg and York defeated the machine guns on the Humserberg. If you look at the 1918 German 1;25,000 map sheet or the official German report about the incident you will clearly see that the Humserberg is actually located just southwest of the town of Cornay an nowhere near this hill. In the German records there are only one or two accounts that mention this hill specifically and in both cases they refer to it by using the elevation reference “153”, the map grid square number the hill is located in “1429” or simply refer to it as the hill west of the “Schlossberg” (Hill 223). The Americans called this hill “Hill 167” for the elevation reference found on the 1918 French 1;20,000 map sheet. Strange that in the American documentation and Signal Corps photographs there are many references to Hill 167 and that it was taken by the main attack of 2nd Battalion, 328th Infantry and not the SGT Early/York patrol. All American accounts show that the “York fight” took place on the western facing slope of the hill located directly southwest of Hill 223, or “Hill 2” as the Germans called it and not where this man claims to have located the exact spot with “100% certainty”.

6.)“100% certainty”, “conclusive, the search is over” and “undisputable piece of evidence”, these are terms not often used in the archeological, historical or scientific communities, yet they are found throughout this man’s writings and articles written on his behalf. What is he afraid of? Someone else may come along and prove him wrong in the near future? Sure seem so.

By SGT Hulka on Jun 23, 2009 at 4:28 pm