Fahnenjunker Schule Potsdam/Grenadier Regiment 1234

German unit histories, lineages, OoBs, ToEs, commanders, fieldpost numbers, organization, etc.

Moderator: Tom Houlihan

Post Reply
User avatar
Doug Nash
Author
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 11:03 am
Location: Washington, DC

Fahnenjunker Schule Potsdam/Grenadier Regiment 1234

Post by Doug Nash »

Hello -
Here's a tough one for you guys ---- call it a challenge.
Does anyone have anything on Grenadier Regiment 1234? This unit was formed in Feb. 1945 from the Fahnenjunker Schule Potsdam, and comprised about 50% Officer candidates, 25% Heer veterans, and about 25% Volkssturm. This much I got from Tessin's volume.
What I need to know was the connection this short-lived regiment had with Pz.Gren.Div. Kurmark - Tessin says that it was briefly under that division's control during one of the battles fought near Kuestrin in Feb. 45 - and that the regiment later came under the control of Inf.Div. 309 "Berlin." Was it part of Kurmark or not?
I already know that Gren.Rgt. 1235 became Pz.Fues.Rgt. "Kurmark" and that Gren.Rgt. 1241 remained with Kurmark from the beginning to the end but was not officially organic to the Kurmark.
Any help would be appreciated --
Cheers,
Doug
User avatar
monmax
Member
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2003 9:46 am
Location: Netherlands

Post by monmax »

Somewhere between february and 16. april it was transferred from 'Kurmark to 309. D where it fought on the Oder front under CI AK.
ThomasR
New Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:23 am

Post by ThomasR »

Hello,

Tony Le Tissier, Zhukov at the Oder, have some little things which might be of some help. He mentionned the Gren.Rgt.1234 only one time, when detailling the 309.I.D order of battle at the eve of the Operation Berlin. But, there is several indications about a Gren.Rgt "Kampfschule Postdam" along with other regiments made-up with personel from officers and NCO schools which were latter renamed in the 123. and 124. series.

According to Le Tissier book's index, the Gren.Rgt.1 "KS Postdam" first showed up on the Oder front on the 03.02.1945 as reinforcement for the German V.SS.Geb. which was facing the 1st Belorussian Front bridgehead around Reitwein. The regiment moved throught Sachsendorf (03.02) and then move around the village of Klessin within the Div. "Raegener" sector (LT, p.56 and 58). It took it positions on the 10.02 (LT, p.67). The Pz.Gren.Div "Kurmark" was builded-up (07.02) and the Gren.Rgt.1 "KS Postdam" was given to the division in order to boost it infantry establishment. (LT, p.67). The regiment was engaged the day of it arrival with a Panther compagny (II./Pz.Rgt "Brandebourg" probably) toward the woods screening Reitwein (LT, p.69). The attack was checked and the Regiment seem to have stayed in the area. Now, we take a quantum leap up to the 06.03.1945. Le Tissier mentionned this time 2 units, the I./Gren.Rgt.1 "KS Postdam" and the Gren.Rgt.1234 (the latter on a situation map). The I./1 KS "P" was located around the village of Wuhden, on the front line (LT, p.69). The .1234 was located between Herzershof and Rathstock. Both units were in the "Kurmark" area. I./1 KS "P" faced an 8th Guards Army night attack on the 06.03 and fortified itself on the village of Wuhden, which in fact was declared "fortress" (LT,p.72). The .1234 faced an 8th Guards Army attack on the 02.03.1945, the Soviets managed to push to a line East of Alt-Tucheband - West of Hathenow (LT, p.66).

This is all Le Tissier have to say. I hope it will be of some help.

Cheers,

Thomas
User avatar
Doug Nash
Author
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 11:03 am
Location: Washington, DC

GR 1234

Post by Doug Nash »

Thanks guys - yeah, I dusted off LeTissiers book and it was pretty helpful - I also dug out my copy of Helmuth Spaeter's Volume III of the GD history & Wilhelm Tieke's book. It makes sense when you figure out that GR 1234 and Fahnenjunker Regiment "Potsdam" are one and the same unit. I also went back to research Tessin, which confirms that too. I only wish I could look at whatever sources that Tessin had - would probably clarify the whole situation.
Thanks again for your help gentlemen -
Doug
Post Reply