
Historians mocked Frederick Forsyth's The Odessa File – but it may have helped catch a Nazi
The death of the novelist, bon viveur and (by his own admission) long-standing MI6 informant, Frederick Forsyth has brought sorrow to the millions of readers who knew that his books were page-turners par excellence. He never pretended to be a great literary stylist, and readily admitted that his primary motivation for writing was financial rather than artistic, but his journalistic attention to detail, ability to come up with complex yet entirely comprehensible storylines and brisk, exciting plotting meant that a Frederick Forsyth book would grip from the first page to the last.
The novel which he is best known for is his debut, 1971's excellent The Day of the Jackal, and few would minimise the impact that it had upon his career. Yet it is his follow-up, 1972's The Odessa File, which led to its own, more consequential tale. It revolves around the young German freelance journalist Peter Miller who, nearly two decades after the end of WWII, investigates the workings of a mysterious organisation known by the acronym 'ODESSA', which stands for 'Organisation der ehemaligen SS-Angehörigen' – otherwise 'Organisation of Former Members of the SS'. (Forsyth's writing cannot be described as subtle, but it's undeniably effective.)
Over the course of its three hundred-odd pages, Miller finds himself being pursued by hitmen hired by the former SS officers, as he goes in search of its members, and attempts to discover what their nefarious plans are.
Just as The Day of the Jackal blended fact – derived from Forsyth's time as a BBC journalist – and fiction to convincing effect, so the success of The Odessa File lies in Forsyth's ability to take an apparently outlandish conceit and make it seem believable. The initial idea for the book came from a Sunday Times article written in July 1967 by the journalist Antony Terry. The piece published a series of unreliable, at times simply false, rumours and stories about escaped Nazis, largely put about by the Holocaust survivor-turned-Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal.
It was common knowledge that several high-ranking Nazis, most notably Adolf Eichmann, had fled to Argentina after the conclusion of WWII, and that some Germans of dubious loyalty had also remained in their home country; others headed over to the United States in order to work on the then-nascent space programme. Wiesenthal was fed inaccurate information – which he then passed over to Terry – by Wilhelm Höttl, a Nazi turned American counter-intelligence agent.
Höttl claimed that 'Odessa' – in reality an informal codeword used by small, semi-independent groups of former SS men to identify themselves to one another – was in fact a carefully organised conspiracy with worldwide reach, which was responsible for the expatriation of leading Nazis to South America.
Höttl was a highly unreliable witness whose primary interests were saving his own skin and appropriating wealth in the process – he had ensured that he had access to many of the Swiss bank accounts that the desperate Germans were placing their money in towards the end of WWII. But it suited Wiesenthal's agenda as a self-styled Nazi hunter to further a narrative of all-powerful SS men at large, including Eichmann and Hitler's private secretary Martin Bormann.
Eichmann was eventually captured in Argentina, taken to Israel and executed in 1962. Bormann – who, in reality, had committed suicide in Germany in 1945, a fact only discovered in 1973 – was supposed to be at large somewhere in the world, carrying on the Führer's nefarious plans and dreaming of creating a Fourth Reich.
Terry's Sunday Times article suggested, with no credible evidence whatsoever, that Odessa had managed not only to extract Bormann from Germany, but that it was an all-powerful organisation with anti-Israeli intentions, intent on destroying the newly formed state. Terry's article may have been largely fantastical, parlaying small nuggets of truth into a largely imagined story. But it drew Forsyth's attention and led to his using it as the basis for his second novel, which came swiftly after the enormous success of The Day of the Jackal.
It is testament to how quickly publishing moved (and Forsyth wrote) in the early Seventies that the book first appeared in October 1972; a mere 16 months after Jackal's initial appearance in Britain. He had written Jackal in 35 days, and although Odessa was not produced in quite such a rush, demand for a new book meant that it was fast-tracked by the eager publishers.
Forsyth's journalistic instincts and ability to tell a ripping yarn are on full display throughout the novel, from the incorporation of real-life characters (including Wiesenthal, who acted as an informal adviser and is therefore portrayed as a flattering mixture of Sherlock Holmes and Oskar Schindler) to the carefully worked-out German setting. It begins in 1963, shortly after JFK's assassination, which gives it the slightest air of distance from the events depicted but nonetheless keeps it supposedly realistic. And there are brilliantly observed suspenseful moments that have the same air of verisimilitude as many of the events in Jackal. Miller escapes assassination by car bomb, for instance, because the hitman's explosives are defeated by his Jaguar XK150's particularly tight suspension.
Nazis have always made for effective villains, and the antagonists in The Odessa File are no exception. The principal baddie Eduard Roschmann, the 'Butcher of Riga' – so called because he was the commandant of the notorious Riga Ghetto during 1943 – is shown in an appropriately nefarious light.
At the time that the book was written, Roschmann was in hiding in Argentina, having become a naturalised citizen under the pseudonym 'Frederico Wagner' – the surname perhaps a nod to Hitler's favourite composer – and Forsyth's portrayal of him was heavily laden with dramatic licence. Although his current hiding place was not then known, Eichmann's high-profile apprehension the decade before had suggested that Nazis were drawn to the anonymity of South America: accurately, in this case.
Many of the fictitious Roschmann's traits and actions are, of course, pure invention – for instance, he is said to answer to SS general Richard Glücks, who died in 1945, and his passport is supposedly procured by Odessa, who were not capable of such intricate acts of forgery. But it was still an act of relative daring to use a real-life, and presumably very much alive, mass murderer as the antagonist, although a man who was on the run for crimes against humanity was hardly likely to pop up and sue for libel.
Although the novel has been described as inaccurate, others have lauded it for sticking relatively close to known facts. 'We cannot blame Forsyth for being inaccurate,' the historian Matteo San Filippo said. 'He was writing a thriller, not an historical essay. The incidents were based on fact and the overall impression was not inaccurate.'
Certainly, it was marketed as fiction, albeit of the sophisticated variety. The first edition blurb read, 'Many characters in The Odessa File are real people. Others may puzzle the reader as to whether they are true or fictional, and the publishers do not wish to elucidate further because it is in this ability to perplex the reader that much of the grip of the story lies.' It soon proved a big hit when it was published in October, and, like its predecessor, sold in its millions. It has remained consistently in print ever since it was published, and, after Jackal and perhaps the Fourth Protocol, remains Forsyth's best-known novel.
However, it received mixed reviews, with some finding it a let-down after Jackal and others praising it as a fresh masterpiece by the thrilling new talent. The Guardian announced that 'in Forsyth's hands the 'documentary thriller' had assumed its most sophisticated form'. But the New York Times, in a scathing review entitled 'Live bombs and dud people', took issue with the publisher's hints that the novel was based on never-before-revealed sources.
Its critic Richard P Brickner stated that the 'book's absorbing facts, made livelier for a while by their moral urgency, will probably sour in your mouth as the moral urgency becomes discoloured'; it went on to criticise the protagonist Miller as colourless, the novel as more concerned with sensation than accuracy and, most damningly, wrote that Forsyth had created a 'vulgar stew of hideous documented fact and flimsy melodrama'.
Brickner concluded, 'The Odessa File leaves one feeling that Forsyth has borrowed painful, live history in order to spring a few quick thrills.' This may have been unfair, but the book's huge commercial success led to the film rights being purchased swiftly and an adaptation going into production almost immediately after it was published. It was directed by veteran British filmmaker Ronald Neame, who had had a significant success with 1972's The Poseidon Adventure, and starred Jon Voight, recently Oscar-nominated for his breakthrough role in Midnight Cowboy.
It did not enjoy either the same critical or commercial success as the 1973 adaptation of The Day of the Jackal, though – the New York Times continued its vendetta by remarking that it was largely devoid of suspense, and that 'these Nazis don't have as much fun as those in The Night Porter'. But it did have one unexpected and welcome legacy. Roschmann was played in the film by the Oscar-winning Swiss actor Maximilian Schell, one of the country's biggest post-war stars. Flattering casting, perhaps; certainly enough to make a vain man want to see it.
Forsyth told the Daily Telegraph in 2011 that the picture indirectly led to the real-life Roschmann's exposure. 'They made [the novel] into a film, which was screened in a little fleapit cinema south of Buenos Aires, where a man stood up and said, 'I know that man, he lives down the street from me,' and denounced him. [The suspect] decided to make a run for it to Paraguay and died of a heart attack on the river crossing. They buried him in an unmarked gravel pit. I hope they tossed a copy of the book on top of him.'
As often with Forsyth, there is a slight element of letting a good story overwhelm the facts – Roschmann died in Paraguay on August 8 1977, several years after the picture opened, rather than in the midst of a dramatic flight. But nonetheless, the renewed attention directed towards him made him a marked man and ensured that he died a hunted fugitive rather than a complacent Argentine citizen.
The Odessa File remains one of Forsyth's most-loved novels, and continues to captivate readers long after its publication. It was announced late last year that he had written a belated sequel, co-written with the novelist Tony Kent, entitled Revenge of Odessa. While no claims are being made for its torn-from-the-headlines qualities this time round, the publisher's blurb makes the book sound like a suitably gripping yarn. Set in both Germany and the United States, the novel revolves around Miller's grandson Georg (a 'journalist and podcaster', we learn) investigating a series of apparently unconnected atrocities that make him the target for hitmen. This is, naturally, because he discovers that 'his would-be assassins are from an organisation known as the Odessa, a menacing and powerful Nazi group intent on regaining power.' As the cover screams, 'The Nazis were never defeated. They were just biding their time.'
The book is published this October (assuming Forsyth managed to finish it) and, with luck, will prove both a fitting sequel and an appropriate swansong for its legendary author. Yet even if it is a disappointment, it should still retain its own fascination. Forsyth commented when the book was announced that 'While The Odessa File was a product of my imagination over 50 years ago, the political realities it describes are still very much with us.' The Nazis themselves may have largely vanished, but with Putin all-powerful in Russia, North Korea's nuclear capabilities and the still-uncertain agenda of China, the concept of a totalitarian state is still more than timely.
After all, the Nazi antagonists of the Odessa movement may never have existed as such, but Forsyth knew villainy where he saw it. Come October, the great storyteller's final book should demonstrate his legendary talents, one last time.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Times
22 minutes ago
- Times
Off with her diamonds! A revolutionary jewel reappears
This month's iteration of Christie's Magnificent Jewels auction is really living up to its name. One of the star lots is a 10.38-carat, kite-shaped pink diamond once owned by the daughter of Marie Antoinette (and, quite possibly by the legendary, ill-fated French queen herself). It has been reimagined by one of the most exclusive — and elusive — contemporary jewellers, JAR, into a ring made from blackened platinum, entirely studded with round diamonds and topped with a regal fleur-de-lis composed of 17 diamonds. Auctioned in Geneva in 1996 by a seller known only as a member of a European royal family, the jewel has spent the subsequent decades hidden from public view. Until now. • Read more luxury reviews, advice and insights from our experts Marie Antoinette, the last queen of France before the Revolution that would cost her her head, and the wife of Louis XVI, is known to posterity for her extravagance and love of the finer things in life. One such passion was jewels. The young queen had an exceptional eye and good taste, often commissioning her own, new items. As well as a personal indulgence, Marie Antoinette's jewels signposted her status and taste to the world. In 1791, as revolutionary forces closed in, Marie Antoinette, her husband the king, and their children fled Paris in disguise, hoping to reach loyalist troops. Escaping under cover of night, their elaborate carriage moved slowly, delayed by poor planning and curious townsfolk. Recognised by a postmaster in Sainte-Menehould, their identities were confirmed in Varennes. The town mobilised to block their path, cutting down a bridge and detaining them. The royal family's failed escape shattered remaining illusions of monarchy, deepening France's revolutionary crisis. Brought back to Paris under guard, their credibility was irreparably damaged, accelerating the move toward republicanism and the king's eventual execution. One of the three children with them on that fateful flight was Marie-Thérèse, the Madame Royale, their eldest child and the only one of the family to survive the fall of the monarchy. She was entrusted with Marie Antoinette's remaining jewels. Whether the pink diamond was among them is a matter of some debate — and there is no concrete evidence to support the theory. What is known is that Marie-Thérèse passed them down to Duchess Marie-Thérèse de Chambord. From there, they remained in the family. The pink diamond makes its first appearance in a will, noting it is owned by Queen Maria Theresa of Bavaria (1849-1919), the last queen of Bavaria, as 'a pink solitaire diamond from Aunt Chambord'. The diamond remained in the family for generations, until that unnamed European royal sold it in 1996. The identity of the 1996 buyer is just as mysterious as the seller — but we know that they asked the ultra-exclusive, private-commission-only jeweller JAR (Joel Arthur Rosenthal), who was one of Elizabeth Taylor's favourites, to create a ring that's part rock and roll, part regal elegance. 'It has everything you could want in a piece of jewellery,' says Rahul Kadakia, the head of jewellery at Christie's International. 'The stone — likely from the prized Indian region of Golconda — has several shades of soft colours, flashing purple and pink from different angles. And it's been transformed into a masterpiece by JAR, all while carrying the splendour of royal provenance.' If, for some reason, the pink diamond isn't your thing, the auction has several other mouthwatering lots, including the Blue Belle necklace that features one of the rarest sapphires in the world, a 392.52-carat stone, set amid a profusion of oval-shaped diamonds, or a Mughal carved emerald necklace that is associated with Nader Shah (1739), the founder of the Afsharid dynasty of Iran who acquired the Koh-i-Noor diamond in 1739.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Starmer accused of U-turn after ordering inquiry into grooming gangs
Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of a U-turn after committing to a statutory inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal. After resisting pressure for months to implement a full probe, the Prime Minister said he had read 'every single word' of an independent report into child sexual exploitation by Baroness Louise Casey and would accept her recommendation for the investigation. Earlier this year, the Government dismissed calls for a public inquiry, saying its focus was on putting in place the outstanding recommendations already made in a seven-year national inquiry by Professor Alexis Jay. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage described the move as a 'welcome U-turn', while Kemi Badenoch called on him to apologise for 'six wasted months'. 'Just like he dismissed concerns about the winter fuel payment and then had to U-turn, just like he needed the Supreme Court to tell him what a woman is, he had to be led by the nose to make the correct decision here,' she said. 'I've been repeatedly calling for a full national inquiry since January. It's about time he recognised he made a mistake and apologised for six wasted months.' Speaking to reporters travelling with him on his visit to Canada, the Prime Minister said: 'I have never said we should not look again at any issue. I have wanted to be assured that on the question of any inquiry. That's why I asked Louise Casey who I hugely respect to do an audit. 'Her position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry over and above what was going on. 'She has looked at the material she has looked at and she has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. 'I have read every single word of her report and I am going to accept her recommendation. That is the right thing to do on the basis of what she has put in her audit.' The Times newspaper reported that the findings of Baroness Casey's review will be set out in Parliament on Monday. The inquiry will be able to compel witnesses to give evidence, and it is understood that it will be national in scope, co-ordinating a series of targeted local investigations. Prof Jay's 2022 report concluded there had been institutional failings across the country and tens of thousands of victims in England and Wales. A national row over grooming gangs was ignited in January after tech billionaire Elon Musk used his X social media platform to launch a barrage of attacks on Sir Keir and safeguarding minister Jess Phillips. It followed the Government's decision to decline a request from Oldham Council for a Whitehall-led inquiry into child sexual abuse in the town. The Government later commissioned a 'rapid' audit by Lady Casey into the nature and scale of group-based child sexual abuse, which had been due to take three months but was delayed.


Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Anthony Horowitz: Don't call me Grandpa, I'm not in the corner dribbling
It is the question facing all men if they are lucky enough to become a grandparent: what would you like to be called by the next generation: Granddad, Grandpa, Grandfather or Gramps? For the bestselling author, Anthony Horowitz, who has two grandchildren, Leander, two, and Cosima, eight months, the answer is none of the above. He said the word grandfather 'carries too much baggage. You know, it says you're old. It says you're superannuated. It says you're sitting in a corner dribbling. It says you are grey. It says you are sort of no longer at the centre of things'. Best known for his children's spy books, the Alex Rider series, which have sold more than 19 million copies worldwide, Horowitz, 70, said his aversion to the word grandfather was partly linked to his deeply 'unpleasant' grandmother.