World War II shipwreck of SS Montevideo Maru, which sank with over 1,000 POWs, found in South China Sea

[Jason D. Tiller]

CNN — A Japanese merchant ship that sank during World War II while carrying over 1,000 prisoners of war in Australia’s largest loss of life at sea has been found.

The Montevideo Maru was discovered off the northwest coast of the Philippines’ Luzon island at a depth of more than 4,000 meters (13,000ft) in the South China Sea, Australian Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles confirmed in a video he posted on Saturday from his Twitter account.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/21/asia/montevideo-maru-found-south-china-sea-intl-hnk/index.html

 

[Steven Christian]

I saw that on the news yesterday. Pretty tragic.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Haven't there been several queries - even accusations - that the Captain and a couple of Officers on board the USS Sturgeon were not entirely unaware of the presence of POWs and civilians on board the Montevideo Maru? I recall reading a few articles and seeing at least one TV documentary (I have a feeling it was an Australian-British one) about it in the past and there were certainly questions asked. The Sturgeon had the Japanese ship in its sights for quite a long time before firing torpedoes and there has been speculation that the hesitant submarine Captain received "secondary" orders to open fire.

In the few months following the strategic American victory at Midway, there was this 'push' by the US Navy to hold on to and extend their advantage over their Imperial Japanese enemies in the Indo-Pacific theatre. I wonder if the "collateral damage" would have been as "acceptable" had the POWs been Americans instead of Australians.

 

[Steven Christian]

Haven't there been several queries - even accusations - that the Captain and a couple of Officers on board the USS Sturgeon were not entirely unaware of the presence of POWs and civilians on board the Montevideo Maru? I recall reading a few articles and seeing at least one TV documentary (I have a feeling it was an Australian-British one) about it in the past and there were certainly questions asked. The Sturgeon had the Japanese ship in its sights for quite a long time before firing torpedoes and there has been speculation that the hesitant submarine Captain received "secondary" orders to open fire.

In the few months following the strategic American victory at Midway, there was this 'push' by the US Navy to hold on to and extend their advantage over their Imperial Japanese enemies in the Indo-Pacific theatre. I wonder if the "collateral damage" would have been as "acceptable" had the POWs been Americans instead of Australians.

There were incidents of American pow's on jap ships getting torpedoed also. They would often put pow's on ships to use as sort of a shield or deterrent.. They would also put pow camps next to targets that they hope wouldn't get bombed. After the Americans took a beating during the Battle of Savo Island and what happened at Guadalcanal it was pretty much gloves off. The japanese started the atrocities. They ended getting payed back in spades. When the U.S.S. Wahoo sunk a jap troop ship they later pulled up and sunk the lifeboats with their 4" gun and then machine gunned the survivors in the water. That was a common thing the japanese did to allied survivors in the water. Some tried to make an issue of it. But the senior admiral didn't have a problem with it. He made some comment about better to kill them in water than have them swim to shore and kill our marines. It was brutal war, a fight to the death. Terrible things happened. But in the end the japanese learned, play stupid games win stupid prizes.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

The Japanese started the atrocities.

I don't doubt that for a single moment. I have had British patients in the 1980s and 90s who had fought against both the Germans and Japanese and almost invariably swore that the ordinary Wehrmacht soldier was far better than the 'average' Japanese one.

But I was speaking specifically about the Montevideo Maru sinking and the bitterness some senior Aussies felt about it. Apparently, Commander William Wright of the USS Sturgeon had been informed about the POWs on board (contrary to official reports you read about even now) and so did not take several opportunities to fire his torpedoes but kept 'pursuing' the target. It has been around 40 years since I saw that documentary but I recall that in the end the decision was taken out of his hands - whatever that meant.

 

[Ezekiel]

Remember this one. One in many "hell ships" sunk with heavy loss of life; several others had a higher death toll but the Montevideo Maru stands out because not a single prisoner survived (unlike about a quarter of the Japanese crew). The entire Rabaul garrison was lost on her, except some officers who had been put on either a different ship or a plane.

Haven't there been several queries - even accusations - that the Captain and a couple of Officers on board the USS Sturgeon were not entirely unaware of the presence of POWs and civilians on board the Montevideo Maru?

How would they be able to know?

The Sturgeon had the Japanese ship in its sights for quite a long time before firing torpedoes and there has been speculation that the hesitant submarine Captain received "secondary" orders to open fire.

By whom, and how?

In the few months following the strategic American victory at Midway, there was this 'push' by the US Navy to hold on to and extend their advantage over their Imperial Japanese enemies in the Indo-Pacific theatre. I wonder if the "collateral damage" would have been as "acceptable" had the POWs been Americans instead of Australians.

Several hell ships loaded with American prisoners were sunk by American submarines.

When the U.S.S. Wahoo sunk a jap troop ship they later pulled up and sunk the lifeboats with their 4" gun and then machine gunned the survivors in the water. That was a common thing the japanese did to allied survivors in the water.

You are talking of the Buyo Maru incident.

Some tried to make an issue of it. But the senior admiral didn't have a problem with it. He made some comment about better to kill them in water than have them swim to shore and kill our marines.

Mind you, it was an issue, as it was a blatant war crime. Of course the Japanese, with their track record of widespread war crimes, fanatism and perfidy, did all their best to provoke their enemies to retaliate in kind.

Unfortunately, in addition to the troops the Buyo Maru there were also 269 Indian POWs, of whom 195 died. They were the minority of those on board, but the majority of the victims.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

How would they be able to know?

I don't know. As I said, I have seen an old Australian-British TV documentary about the Montevideo Maru incident but don't recall all the details. The two things that were highlighted were that the American authorities were not unaware that the MM was carrying POWs and civilians - probably though wartime intelligence information. The documentary did NOT portray Commander Wright as a villain - quite the contrary in fact. The belief was that he did not want to fire on the MM as that ship in itself did not pose a direct military threat but it being July 1942, the US Navy were going all out to push home the advantage they had gained after Midway in the Pacific theater.

 

[Ezekiel]

The two things that were highlighted were that the American authorities were not unaware that the MM was carrying POWs and civilians - probably though wartime intelligence information.

That the American authorities knew is definitely possible, but it is very unlikely this kind of information would be passed down to a specific submarine commander, which they could not even know would run into that specific ship. In the Mediterranean theatre, more or less at this time, British commands knew - through ULTRA - the names of ships carrying British and other Allied prisoners, but decided not to inform submarine commanders so as not to risk raising suspicion about their ability of deciphering Axis messages (the existence of ULTRA remained a secret until the 1970s). POW deaths ensued. The top brass knew, but submarine commanders did not.

 

[Ezekiel]

Some details on the loss of the Montevideo Maru from Combinedfleet:

9 June 1942:
Arrives at Rabaul, New Britain. Disembarks troops and unloads cargo.

21 June 1942:
Embarks 27 guards. Loads one aircraft fuselage, 10 cars and related spare parts.

22 June 1942:
Embarks 1,157 POWs and civilian internees. Departs Rabaul for Samah, Hainan Island without escort.

30 June 1942:
Off northern Philippines. LtCdr William L. Wright’s (USNA ’25) USS Sturgeon (SS-187) running on surface, sights the transport steaming at about 17 knots, too fast for the submarine to approach. Wright decides to pursue MONTEVIDEO MARU.

1 July 1942:
About midnight, MONTEVIDEO MARU’s speed slows to 12 knots as she expects to meet with two destroyers en route to join her as escorts. At 65 miles W of Cape Bojeador, Luzon, about 0326, Wright, unaware of the POWs and civilians aboard, fires a spread of four torpedoes. Two hits are scored on the No. 4 heavy oil tank hold, on starboard. At 0337, MONTEVIDEO MARU sinks by the stern at 18-35N, 120-25E, with the loss of nine crewmen, 11 guards and all POWs and civilian internees.

2 July 1942:

About 70 Japanese survivors in two lifeboats land near Cape Bojeador.

3 July 1942:
The survivors arrive at Bobon Village. Then, guided by a native, they head for a Japanese outpost located at Laoag.

4 July 1942:
Morning. The survivors are attacked by natives and scatter, sustaining heavy casualties with 55 KIA.

5 July 1942:
One survivor arrives at Laoag.

20 July 1942:
Removed from the Navy’s list under instruction No. 1331.

25 July 1942:
A Japanese rescue party recovers a total of 25 exhausted and starving survivors.

 

[Steven Christian]

Ezekial, Arun. Informative information you posted. Thanks. Ezekial when I said some wanted to make an issue of it I should have said they wanted to make a "legal" issue of it. There were those in the JAG corps that wanted to bring charges but the higher ups shot that down. Same thing happened in Europe. When the U.S. troops first liberated Dachau they were so upset by what they saw they lined up many of the nazi guards against a wall and gunned them down. The rest they took to the courtyard and turned them over to the former inmates who promptly dispatched them in a most brutal manner. The army JAG corps wanted to charge the soldiers. General Patton stepped in and put a stop to that saying he didn't see a problem with what happened. In other words "payback is a b!~~~". I think it would have been almost impossible to bring any charges against the things going on at that time. Especial when one of the most senior commanders was always saying things like in the pic below. Cheers.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

When the U.S. troops first liberated Dachau they were so upset by what they saw the lined up many of the nazi guards against a wall and gunned them down. The rest they took to the courtyard and turned them over to the former inmates who promptly dispatch them in a most brutal manner.

I have read about this and sometimes compared it with the less "intensive" treatment of the captured German soldiers when the British-Canadian troops liberated Bergen-Belsen. There of course, spreading typhus was a far bigger immediate concern with both sides and it took its toll.

Not sure specifically of Dachau but there have been doubts expressed whether many of the Germans left to guard the prisoners of soon-to-be liberated concentration camps were really "Nazis". Certainly, in the areas of (what is now) Belarus and Poland, most SS guards and other Nazi staff fled before the advancing Russians arrived, leaving behind skeleton staff as guards, often made-up with cooks, cleaners etc pulled out of the Wehrmacht. Of course, considering the atrocities that they had faced themselves at the hands of the Nazis over the past 3 and a half years, the Russians were out for revenge and did not really care who was really wearing the German uniform in front of them.

I think it would have been almost impossible to bring any charges against the things going on at that time.

Absolutely true. It was quite literally a military version of "dog eat dog".

We human beings are not as discerning as we like to think and with sufficient provocation can resort to the sort of bestiality that no animal ever would. Several unspeakable things happened during the two World Wars and not all atrocities of WW2 were perpetrated by the Germans and the Japanese; two examples are the terrible Volyn Massacre of 1943 which almost certainly included Titanic survivor Rosa Pinsky as one of the victims and of course, the better known Katyn Forest Massacre a few years earlier. Even the so-called "civilized" countries are not immune; you probably know about the infamous Jalianwalla Bagh massacre of mostly women and children by the British in 1919 or the "revenge" murder of innocent Sikhs following the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984.

 

[Steven Christian]

I have read about this and sometimes compared it with the less "intensive" treatment of the captured German soldiers when the British-Canadian troops liberated Bergen-Belsen. There of course, spreading typhus was a far bigger immediate concern with both sides and it took its toll.

Not sure specifically of Dachau but there have been doubts expressed whether many of the Germans left to guard the prisoners of soon-to-be liberated concentration camps were really "Nazis". Certainly, in the areas of (what is now) Belarus and Poland, most SS guards and other Nazi staff fled before the advancing Russians arrived, leaving behind skeleton staff as guards, often made-up with cooks, cleaners etc pulled out of the Wehrmacht. Of course, considering the atrocities that they had faced themselves at the hands of the Nazis over the past 3 and a half years, the Russians were out for revenge and did not really care who was really wearing the German uniform in front of them.


Absolutely true. It was quite literally a military version of "dog eat dog".

We human beings are not as discerning as we like to think and with sufficient provocation can resort to the sort of bestiality that no animal ever would. Several unspeakable things happened during the two World Wars and not all atrocities of WW2 were perpetrated by the Germans and the Japanese; two examples are the terrible Volyn Massacre of 1943 which almost certainly included Titanic survivor Rosa Pinsky as one of the victims and of course, the better known Katyn Forest Massacre a few years earlier. Even the so-called "civilized" countries are not immune; you probably know about the infamous Jalianwalla Bagh massacre of mostly women and children by the British in 1919 or the "revenge" murder of innocent Sikhs following the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984.

Yes Arun you are correct. These things weren't limited to the last 2 world wars. There as old as war itself. In American schools when I grew up they always taught a sanitized version of history with the exception of covering the holocaust. Even the 20 or so history classes I took in college it was pretty much the same thing with a few exceptions. Things that went on during the american revolution and the civil war were pretty grusome. But those things were mostly carried out by rouge groups and not sanctioned by the main armies. Sadly it hasn't stopped. Isis in the middle east are still doing things on par or worse with anything that has happened before.

 

[Ezekiel]

On the topic of the "hell ships". Besides the Montevideo Maru and the Buyo Maru, several others were sunk with heavy loss of life:

• Junyo Maru, sunk by HMS Tradewind on 18 September 1944: 4,171 Indonesian forced laborers and 1,449 mostly Dutch POWs lost, with only 200 forced laborers and 674 POWs surviving. One of the greatest maritime disasters of the war.
• Tango Maru, sunk by USS Rasher on 25 February 1944: c. 3,000 Indonesian forced laborers and hundreds of Dutch colonial POWs lost, c. 500 survivors.
• Arisan Maru, sunk by USS Shark on 24 October 1944: 1,772 Allied POWs and civilian internees lost, only nine survived (one of whom died shortly after reaching land in Japanese-controlled territory).
• Rakuyo Maru, sunk by USS Sealion on 12 September 1944: 1,159 British and Australian POWs lost, out of 1,317 onboard.
• Hofuku Maru, sunk by American aircraft on 21 September 1944: 1,047 British and Dutch POWs lost, out of 1,289 onboard.
• Lisbon Maru, sunk by USS Grouper on 1 October 1942: 826 British POWs lost, out of 1,816 onboard.
• Shinyo Maru, sunk by USS Paddle on 7 September 1944: 687 mostly American POWs killed, with only 82 survivors.
• Tamahoko Maru, sunk by USS Tang on 24 June 1944: 560 Dutch, Australian, British and American POWs lost, out of 772 onboard.
• Suez Maru, sunk by USS Bonefish on 29 November 1943: 548 British and Dutch POWs lost, no survivors. At least 250 managed to abandon ship but were killed by the Japanese in the water.
• Kachidoki Maru, sunk by USS Pampanito on 12 September 1944: 431 British POWs lost out of 950 onboard.
• Enoura Maru, sunk by aircraft from USS Hornet in the harbour of Kaohsiung on 9 January 1945: c. 350 POWs killed out of c. 1,400 aboard, mostly Americans. They were survivors of the Oryoku Maru (see below).
• Oryoku Maru, sunk by aircraft from USS Hornet on 15 December 1944: c. 270 American POWs killed out of 1,620 onboard.

In general there were many disasters involving ships carrying prisoners, from all sides. British ships carrying Italian and German POWs and internees (Laconia, Nova Scotia, Shuntien, Arandora Star, Empress of Canada), Italian ships carrying British and Commonwealth POWs (Scillin, Tembien, Sebastiano Venier, Nino Bixio, Ariosto, Loreto), German ships carrying Italian “military internees” captured after the Armistice of Cassibile (Ardena, Marguerite, Oria, Sinfra, Petrella, Donizetti, Mario Roselli), German ships carrying Soviet POWs (Rigel, Palatia). Not to mention the bay of Lubeck disaster involving concentration camp prisoners, and the sinking of Tanais carrying the Cretan Jews towards extermination (as they were bound for Treblinka, their eventual fate would not have been different if the ship had reached her destination...)

the terrible Volyn Massacre of 1943 which almost certainly included Titanic survivor Rosa Pinsky as one of the victims

That's beyond awful, by far the worst fate to befall a Titanic survivor that I know of.

Perhaps she should be added to this page - I previously thought that George Thresher and Edgar Perry were the only Titanic survivors to have died in World War II.

 

[Steven Christian]

Lots of info in that post. Thanks. I know Arun researched Rosa Pinsky. I tried also but didn't find anything more than Arun did. I think Arun's conclusion is probably the correct one but I couldn't find a definite answer. Extensive list of ships you gave. Just a side note but one of the meanings of the word maru is ship. I only know that because one the nicknames of my ship was the Coral Maru. Never made sense to me when people called her that. Cheers.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

That's beyond awful, by far the worst fate to befall a Titanic survivor that I know of.

It is. I found it gut-churning and had to stop reading the article after a while.

I know Arun researched Rosa Pinsky. I tried also but didn't find anything more than Arun did.

Neither did I, as a matter of fact. I lost touch with Nicolay, my Russian contact about Rosa Pinsky somewhere in late 2020. At the time he had told me that he and his Israeli contact Moshe Krumann were trying to get more information but never got back to me. I think it's time I tried again.