The Family Story and Remembering a Soldier

Please bear with me as I get a train of thought out. I have been talking with a colleague who identifies himself (as I do) as a historian and genealogist. We were talking about the NARA records article I shared yesterday and a comment I saw about genealogists not being included in this NARA survey. This colleague and I talked about this article and that comment, which led into a discussion about the telling of family stories and the research that is involved in genealogy related to those stories. That led me to a realization. The point of this blog post is about the STORY passed down through the family. In my military lectures and books I start out with the family story.

One guy in particular, Frankie Winkler, who was a D-Day guy. He was not. I explain the family story is he went in with the 29th on D-Day and received head wounds. He died a few weeks later of those wounds. He spoke German and did reconnaissance work. The family swore – still to this day they swear, the photo of one of the guys from the 1st Division who came onto Omaha with the 29th that was in Life magazine is Frankie. It is not. The family also said Frankie enlisted. He did not. They say that people would come into his dad’s (also Frank) Butcher Shop and ask why Frankie had not gone off to serve. He had started college. So there was some shame involved and pressure.

The records show Frankie was 18 years and ¾ months when he was inducted into the Army. That was correct for late 1943 – the Army had changed the rules regarding age. He had graduated HS and probably was in college (this has yet to be confirmed.) So he was the “right” age to go off and serve but couldn’t until the Army would accept him. Did he speak German? Maybe but the records show he was placed into Camp Wolters, TX – an infantry replacement training camp. He was being trained to be a rifleman. Did he do reconnaissance work?

Joe Balkoski the former 29th Historian worked with me and got me the Morning Reports. They only show Frankie coming into the 29th Division, 115th Reg on 23 June, KIA 24 June. It does not specify from where he came – Joe said an Infantry Replacement Depot in England or Ireland. His obit says he was in Ireland so he must have sent letters home. One family member has some but won’t share because she says they are too personal. Joe said he likely went out on patrol (reconnaissance) the 23rd and was killed within 24 hours.

That’s what the records show. A different story than the family. And I show the paper trail and explain my reasoning through military and genealogical records and history about how I arrived at this altered version of the story. I also think the family may have received  a letter perhaps from someone in the 29th after he was killed that used the word reconnaissance. Think about that – reconnaissance is a more impressive word than the phrase, “out on patrol.”  So over time these stories about our soldier and war dead may become embellished a little because of our use of words. Maybe the family used this as a coping mechanism. Their boy wasn’t just “one of the thousands of riflemen lost” he was doing reconnaissance because he spoke German – he was in their eyes perhaps more important than a rifleman.

Stories like this get passed down all the time but I never considered the WORDING used in stories that get passed down and how they can be interpreted until this discussion. I also think that often, families are worried that if they dig into records, the story will change. And does THAT add shame or something else to the soldier or the family if the story is different? Are we dishonoring the memory of that soldier if the records show something different?

How do YOU cope with the changes in family stories based on the records you uncover? Do you tell the new story in comparison to the old? Do you take into account how the family has felt about this story, this individual or family involved, through the generations? How do you dig into the records and deal with the outcome? Or  do you even bother to dig?

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

© 2014, Jennifer Holik, Generations

Print Friendly
Categories: Books, Military Research | Tags: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “The Family Story and Remembering a Soldier

  1. Mark Garrity

    I think if he was going to be tasked with going out on patrol to capture and question German prisoners that sounds more dangerous than simply being a rifleman. Digging further it would be interesting to know what the 29th Division, 115th Reg was doing and where they were on June 24th. Was the division in heavy fighting that day as part of the breakout from Normandy? Were the lines static? He may have been part of a general advance or small unit action. In any event to suffer lethal head wounds one day into his deployment with his new division is sad. Steven Ambrose wrote about the lousy Repo-Depot system that sent men as replacements to new units where they knew no one and didn’t develop any chemistry or teamwork before being sent into combat.

    • Hi Mark,
      The records that exist do not say much. And they do not point to him trying to capture Germans (at this point.) He was put into the unit from a Replacement Depot (which one specifically was not mentioned in the Morning Report.) The 115th was under heavy fighting at that time but I have no evidence that he was doing more than going on patrol. Joseph Balkoski also wrote about the Repo-Depot system in his book about the 29th “Beyond the Beachhead.” All sad stuff.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current month ye@r day *

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Adventure Journal by Contexture International.