Disney asked Allies not to bomb Neuschwanstein Castle

I was presented with a rumour the other day that left me rather surprised... not least becasue I couldn't really find much information about it online, neither to confirm nor to disprove it. So I thought I'd ask around a bit.

What I was told was that during WW II, Wlat Disney himself had asked both Chruchill and Rooseveldt to make sure not to bomb Neuschwanstein castle (which very obviously is the inspiration for the Cinderella castle), and that was the only reason that the castle still stands.

Now, to me that sounds very far-fetched indeed. I don't see why Disney would do that, nor why Churchill and Rooseveldt would grant him a wish like that. But as I said, I couldn't find any information at all on that claim.
So did the person that told me this pull it all out of their a**?
Does anybody know more about this?

[Twankydillo]

Why would they bomb Neuschwanstein castle? Was it utilised during the wars or target-worthy for other reasons? (I'm generally curious - I don't know much about it outside of the little tour we had of it in Gabriel Knight II!)

[Syllavus]

Originally Posted by Twankydillo

(I'm generally curious - I don't know much about it outside of the little tour we had of it in Gabriel Knight II!)

You too huh? I love that game.

[UEL]

Originally Posted by Twankydillo

Why would they bomb Neuschwanstein castle? Was it utilised during the wars or target-worthy for other reasons? (I'm generally curious - I don't know much about it outside of the little tour we had of it in Gabriel Knight II!)

One thing about castles and other landmarks that don't make them good targets (unless used for military purposes) that also prevented their destruction was the fact that these landmarks were, well, landmarks.

Bombers in those days were not very capable of flying long ways on inertial navigation systems and getting within the target area. One of the ways of navigating at the time was to fly in a known direction for a known amount of time, identify a landmark (which castles were good because they were usually on hills and were unique) and adjust from there. Other landmarks were bridges over rivers, tributaries, specific road junctions and other landmarks.

The Germans did the same thing. During the Blitz, Tower Bridge was used as the landmark for every bombing run on London.

I can't speak specifically for Neuschwanstein Castle, but it would be a great landmark. Besides, nothing was occurring militarily anywhere near that area.

[Alchemy]

Originally Posted by UEL

Bombers in those days were not very capable of flying long ways on inertial navigation systems and getting within the target area.

Aircraft inertial navigation systems weren't invented until the 1950s, and were too inaccurate and expensive to be in common use until the 1970s. WWII navigation was done by visual pilotage/dead reckoning (as you say), and (if possible) radio direction finders. WWII bombing missions were delayed if the target or other important visual waypoints had poor weather.

[Don Enrico]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

Aircraft inertial navigation systems weren't invented until the 1950s, and were too inaccurate and expensive to be in common use until the 1970s. WWII navigation was done by visual pilotage/dead reckoning (as you say), and (if possible) radio direction finders.

Which is another reason why (at least some) churches where spared from bombing - their spires made good waymarks for oncoming bomber squads. Hamburg saw some very heavy bombing by the allies, but only one major church was hit. The ruin remains a war memorial today (St. Nikolai's church).

Don Enrico

[ChickMarie]

Originally Posted by Twankydillo

I don't know much about it outside of the little tour we had of it in Gabriel Knight II!)

Quick hijack here.
Whoa! It's weird that this came up because I recently dragged out all of my old PC games and GKII is the one I'm replaying now!

Ok, hijack over.

[Ramblin' Dave]

Disney did indeed have the ear of official Washington in those days, but he wasn't that powerful.

[RobDBlackwolf]

I too love GKII (heck! All three GKs), mostly because I was born and raised in Munich (where most of the game's action is) (and yes, the plan for the subway is actually a copy of the original Munich subway plan and they did use picture of the original places,etc)..

But for Neuschwanstein.

I simply think it was no viable target, that's all. Too far from any towns of decent size, and they would have to fly away from Munich to find it (it's south-west of Munich, they mostly came from the north-west I think).

[BennyTheDip]

Was Neuschwanstein Castle the inspiration for the Cinderella castle in the movie as well as the Sleeping Beauty castle in Disneyland? I ask because the Disneyland one didn't get built until the mid to late '50s.

Originally Posted by RobDBlackwolf

But for Neuschwanstein.

I simply think it was no viable target, that's all. Too far from any towns of decent size, and they would have to fly away from Munich to find it (it's south-west of Munich, they mostly came from the north-west I think).

That was pretty much my way of thinking as well... it's nowhere near a major town, it's in the middle of mountains and a very, very small target. So why would they even consider bombing it?
But it's always difficult proving a negative with just plain logic...

[Troberg]

Just look at how much the Allies agonized over bombing Cassino, and there was even a very valid strategic reason to do so, as it was halting the entire advance through Italy.

When they finally bombed it, it was found to be counterproductive, but that's another story...

[Eddylizard]

Originally Posted by Troberg

Just look at how much the Allies agonized over bombing Cassino, and there was even a very valid strategic reason to do so, as it was halting the entire advance through Italy.

When they finally bombed it, it was found to be counterproductive, but that's another story...

According to a documentary I saw, according to an unwritten agreement, religious sites were forbidden from being used for military purposes, and therefore not permitted to be bombed. However if the religious site was used for military purposes, then the gloves were off so to speak, and it was a valid target.

Of course these rules were stretched, such as in the bombing of Coventry and the destruction of it's cathedral (and probably similar in our destruction of Dresden, and many other examples) however with religious sites in large cities one could stay within the rules by simply claiming that the relegious sites were collateral damage.

It was noticed that German troops could be seen inside Monte Cassino, which led to the Allied belief that the Germans were using it as an observation post (and it was well situated). In fact there were only a handful of wounded German troops inside, trying to recover.

Since we considered that Cassino was being used by the Germans as an observation post, that greenlighted us to bomb the hell out of it. In retrospect, we were wrong.

However, it was not holding up our invasion of Italy, the command at the time mistakenly believed it was.

[ganzfeld]

Originally Posted by Eddylizard

According to a documentary I saw, according to an unwritten agreement, religious sites were forbidden from being used for military purposes, and therefore not permitted to be bombed. [...]

It wasn't unwritten. From the Hague IV (1899?):

Article 25: The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited.
[...]
Article 27: In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and charity, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not used at the same time for military purposes.
[...]

[Eddylizard]

Originally Posted by ganzfeld

It wasn't unwritten. From the Hague IV (1899?):

I stand corrected, thank you.

Less seriously, I heard that WWII was started at the insistance of Hollywood film producers looking to revitalise the film industry with a near endless stream of movies about the event.

[Skeptic]

Article 25: The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited.
[...]
Article 27: In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and charity, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not used at the same time for military purposes.
[...]

I wonder where wars better when they were fought to rules. Somehow I don't think so.

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by Twankydillo

Why would they bomb Neuschwanstein castle? Was it utilised during the wars or target-worthy for other reasons? (I'm generally curious - I don't know much about it outside of the little tour we had of it in Gabriel Knight II!)

OK, it's about 25 years since I was there, so the memory is streched a bit, but the following applies I think...
The castle is in the middle of nowhere, away from most roads, so its use as a observation post is not viable.
It's not the highest point in the surrounding countryside, so it would not make much of a landmark anyway.
Access is limited, and very steep, so it was unlikely that it could be used for storage, or manufacture, etc.
Other castles also escaped bombings, such as Heidleburg, because there was nothing in them that warrented attention from the air forces.
It's actually quite small, (in area), and would have been a difficult target anyway.

[ganzfeld]

This story is true but what is less well known is that Volkswagen asked Hitler not to bomb Cinderella Castle. And no one knows why.