Saxon, Prussian and Bavarian attitudes to the war

[Drew-1918]

No joking with me, I am a direct Prussian descendant and I still have the serious do-not-make-prisoners genes inside myself .

[Drew-1918]

JWK & Uncle George,

I see what you mean about 'Prussia'. Its very complicated and I am extremely confused. It seems to move around the map of Germany depending on which period of history you are looking at; East Prussia, West Prussia, Posen, etc

In ancient times the Saxons occupied the area just below Denmark*. Perhaps why the Hanoverians are sometimes referenced as being part of 'Lower Saxony'? (I believe 'Low German' is known as 'Low Saxon' in the Netherlands?). In JWK's map, this area is part of the more modern area of 'Prussia'. All goes to show the danger of trying to define different national character types to rigidly I suppose.

Wait a minute... The Saxons are really Prussian ?!

*Edit- From Kathleen Herbert the Lost Gods of England, 2005, Anglo-Saxon Books

Oops! I see Trajan already mentioned the Hanoverian connection a while back. Apologies.

[Uncle George]

I would heartily recommend 'Iron Kingdom' to you. It contains a marvellous contemporary cartoon entitled 'His Majesty explains enemy positions to Prince Ludwig of Bavaria': "The stereotypical Prusso-Bavarian contrasts are exquisitely captured in the postures and clothing of the two figures. While William stands ramrod-straight in his immaculate uniform and spiked helmet, in cavalry boots that gleam like columns of polished ivory, Prince Ludwig resembles a human bean-bag. Loose trousers crumple shapelessly down his legs and a whiskery face peers bewilderedly from behind a pince-nez. Everything that is erect and dominant in the Prussian is cosily flaccid in the Bavarian."

Christopher Clark examines to what extent there was a specifically Prussian dimension to the war. "A war on two fronts, encirclement by a coalition of European powers - these had traditionally been Prussian, rather than Saxon, Badensian or Bavarian nightmares."

[Uncle George]

Here's that cartoon, found online. 'His Majesty explains enemy positions to Prince Ludwig of Bavaria.'

[trajan]

One thing to remember here is that the Prussians did have a habit of forcing their domination over their neighbours. E.g., the Prussian-Austrian war over the control of Bavaria. Not exactly the best way to make good friends out of the members of those states that eventually formed the Prussian-ordered Reich in 1870/71.

[Uncle George]

One thing to remember here is that the Prussians did have a habit of forcing their domination over their neighbours. E.g., the Prussian-Austrian war over the control of Bavaria. Not exactly the best way to make good friends out of the members of those states that eventually formed the Prussian-ordered Reich in 1870/71.

Yes. Clark notes that the war exacerbated anti-Prussian sentiments and resentments. He mentions that the "monitoring of letters from front-line soldiers revealed that denigration of 'the Prussians' was common among the Rhenish, Hanoverian, Hessian and even Silesian troop units. The same applied to an even greater degree to Bavarian troops..."

[Drew-1918]

OK, thanks very much for those points gents. Interesting to bear in mind.

Hindenburg talks of a great togetherness following the victory of 1870. In reference to the ceremony for the Proclamation of the Emperor at Versailles in 1871 he says:

“The affectionate enthusiasm for the illustrious sovereign was fully shared by all present, no matter to what German tribe they belonged. Indeed our South German brothers gave the most vociferous expression to their joy...”

Reading what he says, I get the feeling he is tacitly replying to criticism from other quarters. i.e. It is as if he is saying you were supportive of the Prussian ideal when things were going well, but later on… However, in mentioning things like this, he is effectively acknowledging the difference in attitudes. Ludendorff says as much later on when he mentions the deterioration in the relationships between the Prussians and Bavarians, towards the end of the war.

When discussing Hanoverian ‘aloofness’ following victory over Austria in 1866, Hindenburg adds that he understands their loyalty to their hereditary royalty, but that union was nonetheless “essential”. I think this takes us back to Clark, who, I think you said, points out that this might have been mainly a Prussian preoccupation.

Uncle George,

I might be mistaken but I could have sworn I’d seen that picture used on a GCSE paper a few years ago when I was a nipper. But I could be wrong. Neatly sums up the stereotypical contrasts, as you say. Thanks too for the recommendation. Sounds like a must read.

I think it is notable though, that despite the talk of tensions at this time, Germany appears today far less likely than the United Kingdom of having its constituent states break away. Perhaps this points to the overall unity of the German peoples, as the ‘Prussians’ said? Though clearly, there were marked differences between the different member states at this time.

Many thanks again,

Chris

[teabreak]

One of the consistent themes which emerges in British trench memoirs is the distinction which British soldiers made between Germans of different origin. There was some fairly broad brush stereotyping by British soldiers designed to explain differences in behaviour by troops in the opposing trenches. eg a commonly expressed British view is Saxons = good, Prussians = bad (Saxons were thought to be far more liable to "live and let live", and to be in favour of truces and cease fires - for example in the winter of 14/15). I can post some examples of the British trench memoirs on this theme if anybody is interested.

In turn, this approach tapped into some (politically incorrect!) ideas about sources of national character - the idea that there were almost racial/tribal differences between different types of European, which explained their different approaches - for this look at some of the pre-war "invasion scare" novels (eg Riddle of the Sands) in which the English are treated almost as a separate "race", as are their potential enemies across the North Sea. These novels were widely read by soldiers in the FWW, and would have informed the way in which in which soldiers tried to understand the people who they were shooting at/being shot at by. This approach easily spilled over into making distinctions (whether accurate or not!) about different groups of Germans.

[Drew-1918]

Thanks a lot teabreak!

Any examples are always very welcome and I'm sure would be of great interest.

The information about preconceived notions of what a different national type was like is very interesting. I'm sure there must be a lot in it. I imagine it must be difficult, if not impossible, for someone to sort out, in any reported situation, where the pure stereotyping and verifiable fact overlap.

Makes you think though. Thanks again,

Chris

[EastSurrey]

The British Official Historian quoted on p85 of his Occupation of the Rhineland, the old German saying 'The Pomeranian will march till he dies, the Brandenburger until he drops , the Saxon until he is tired and the Rhinelander as long as he feels inclined.'

Michael

[seaforths]

I know the cartoon posted was for humorous purposes but they actually did put a lot of store on appearances in those days. I can still remember some of the belters my grandma used to come out with; 'never trust a person that has no earlobes' and 'where eyebrows meet, there lies deceit' (in reference to people with mono-brows). In amongst my diaries is a British assessment of a captured POW as being stumpy and undersized - obviously below average intelligence. I do wonder if some of it had to do with regimental appearance and bearing in a uniform - the Prussian feeling and therefore acting superior and the self fulfilling prophecy of the repressed other - thus causing antagonism?

[trajan]

Only got to p.58 of S.Hedin's With the German Army' so far, but on p. 28 he stresses how German success in the war is guaranteed because the German army is 'one homogeneous whole and pure in race' - but he is writing in the early Autumn of 1914...

Trajan

[healdav]

When the Kaiser declared war he did so on behalf of Germany, but had to ask the Bavarians to join in!

In fact, even today Bavaria is not convinced that it is part of Germany. I was amazed some years ago when travelling from Austria to Germany to find that the border guards had "BayernSchutz" on their uniforms and not Deutsch.

Even when I was a nuclear inspector with a right to go into any establishment when I wanted (that's a laugh; give a week's notice and have a minder), we could only go into Bavaria after due notice to Munich, and the instructions from Munich to the establishments was to treat inspectors as ordinary visitors as Bavaria did not recognise either the Euratom Treaty or the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons!!

Imagine in 1914.

[trajan]

When the Kaiser declared war he did so on behalf of Germany, but had to ask the Bavarians to join in!

In fact, even today Bavaria is not convinced that it is part of Germany. I was amazed some years ago when travelling from Austria to Germany to find that the border guards had "BayernSchutz" on their uniforms and not Deutsch.

The Bavarians were notorious for being slow to adopt the decisions of the Reich (i.e., Prussian) Ministry of War regarding the adoption and marking of specific weapons (e.g., rifles and bayonets), and would always delay introducing their own version of these. I would guess that the same streak of independence (from Berlin-issued rules) applies today - true, modern Germany is a federal State constituted from Lander that all have their own parliaments, but the Bayerische parliament does seem to be the most vocal in opposition to Berlin-made laws.

Trajan

[Drew-1918]

Cheers everyone.

Very interesting. Nice to have the example of Bavaria. Has been a lot on the Saxons.

It seems to me like there is a real mix of evidence, both for the unity and non-unity arguments. Questioning of the stereotypes as well as ample evidence difference.

Chris

[egbert]

Bavaria and the English, OMG.

Long live the stereotypes. The only stereotype I can assure you is -they brew the better beer.

There is no such thing like "Bayernschutz". Border police is not a state affair but a federal (country) affair, they are called Federal Police. Bayernschutz may have been be a private uniformed security company, protecting a beer tent event.

Euratom Treaty or the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons- Bavaria is a state and these laws are federal laws. In Germany there is the overruling law: federal law breaks state law.

And - the present party that runs Bavaria is part of the coalition that runs Germany. They have signed the coalition agreement and are equally responsible for any laws. If they criticize Berlin laws than by nature they would criticize themselves.

Oh dear, let's get back to Saxons, no Bavarian stereotypes please. On the other hand- I will open a better beer now-Bavarian beer.

[Chris Boonzaier]

Ages ago I read a memoire of a prussian soldier who woke up in a bavarian field hospital. hearing his accent the men mobbed him, medics did not change dressings, the people in his room did not talk to him, he did not get a mess tin... etc. etc...

after a short while he convinced one and all that he was actually a saxon by birth... then he was accepted by the bavarians...

it was interesting reading...

[trajan]

And - the present party that runs Bavaria is part of the coalition that runs Germany. They have signed the coalition agreement and are equally responsible for any laws. If they criticize Berlin laws than by nature they would criticize themselves.

Oh dear, let's get back to Saxons, no Bavarian stereotypes please. On the other hand- I will open a better beer now-Bavarian beer.

Thanks for the correction Egbert - either my brain was in a Franz Josef'ish time-warp or the utterings this morning of my acting HOD - a Regensburger - had numbed my brain... Mind you, only yesterday I spent 4 hours between flights at my favourite airport - Munchen...!!! (I recommend the leberkase and Nurnberger rotbratwurst and Helles at the Airbrau!).

Stereotypes - Hey where is the land of gemutlichkeit? And I do think sometimes that it was NOT entirely by accident / treaty / agreements that post-WW2 the Brits got the North and the fun-loving Yanks got the south...

[Uncle George]

In 'Mein Kampf' Hitler (who served of course in the Bavarian army) reported that he experienced anti-Prussian feelings everywhere in Munich when there on leave: "The work of inciting the people against the Prussians increased. And just as nothing was done at the front to put a stop to the venomous propaganda, so here at home no official steps were taken against it. Nobody seemed capable of understanding that the collapse of Prussia could never bring about the rise of Bavaria. On the contrary, the collapse of the one must necessarily drag the other down with it."

This quote appears in Thomas Weber's 'Hitler's First War' (2010). Weber makes reference to the significance of the Catholic nature of Bavaria. For instance: "While Catholic [army] chaplains were priests of a global and universal Church, Protestant chaplains were members of an essentially national church. It was thus much easier and much more tempting for them to stress the national mission of the war."

[teabreak]

Another layer to the topic of "German" v "Bavarian/Saxon etc", is that in the FWW Germans sometimes tried to argue that the English (?British) were part a larger Anglo-German family - this approach depends on the idea that there is a German identity which goes beyond its constituent parts - obviously, these ideas were developed in the 20s/30s in a more sinister form. An example is found in Manfred von Richthofen's autobiography, in which he explains the courage of RFC pilots as proof of the fact that the English are related to the Germans.

[IRC Kevin]

Another layer to the topic of "German" v "Bavarian/Saxon etc", is that in the FWW Germans sometimes tried to argue that the English (?British) were part a larger Anglo-German family - this approach depends on the idea that there is a German identity which goes beyond its constituent parts - obviously, these ideas were developed in the 20s/30s in a more sinister form. An example is found in Manfred von Richthofen's autobiography, in which he explains the courage of RFC pilots as proof of the fact that the English are related to the Germans.

It's interesting how much 'Saxon' has remained in the local dialect up here. You still hear people say they're 'klempt' or 'knacht' (pronounced the German way). The locals tend to say 'nay' rather than 'no', something I heard a lot in Germany (instead of 'nein'.) I wouldn't mind betting that 'slutch' comes from there too.

[Drew-1918]

Thanks everyone for your all your fascinating comments.

Re the 'English'/Germanic language links: I read in an English grammar book (sorry, cant remember which one), that it is estimated that 60% of words used in everyday English are of Germanic origin. But obviously, words surviving in different areas in their almost original form is another thing. I'm sure I have come across quite a few examples before. A little bit further north than yourself Kevin , there's Lowland Scotch, with its "Bairn" and words like that.

Chris

[Ron Clifton]

Bavaria and the English, OMG.

Long live the stereotypes. The only stereotype I can assure you is -they brew the better beer.... On the other hand- I will open a better beer now-Bavarian beer.

Bavarians may brew better lager, but the certainly don't brew a better ale than the British or Belgians!

Ron

[healdav]

Bavaria and the English, OMG.

Long live the stereotypes. The only stereotype I can assure you is -they brew the better beer.

There is no such thing like "Bayernschutz". Border police is not a state affair but a federal (country) affair, they are called Federal Police. Bayernschutz may have been be a private uniformed security company, protecting a beer tent event.

Euratom Treaty or the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons- Bavaria is a state and these laws are federal laws. In Germany there is the overruling law: federal law breaks state law.

And - the present party that runs Bavaria is part of the coalition that runs Germany. They have signed the coalition agreement and are equally responsible for any laws. If they criticize Berlin laws than by nature they would criticize themselves.

Oh dear, let's get back to Saxons, no Bavarian stereotypes please. On the other hand- I will open a better beer now-Bavarian beer.

Believe me, there was no beer tent on the train, and they were checking passports.

As for the treaties; I suggest you write to Munich and tell them. I am only telling it as it is.

[joerookery]

As usual I'm late to the party. This is an incredibly complex subject. It is made more complex by trying to stuff certain language nuances into English. It is explained in detail, in English, in the first three chapters of "The Great War Dawning".

Independent state status during the time of the Holy Roman Empire was up around 380 entities. That shrunk to thirty-nine with Napoleon. A few more states went away but we are talking about around twenty-five when Germany unified in 1871. Prior to that there was no Germany. One of the problems a unified Germany faced was taking these various states and regions and melding them into a national identity. While this was not easy it is complicated by the names of states and what people consider themselves to be.

Let's take Saxony for instance. Saxony was a kingdom also known as the "Red Kingdom" because of the huge number of socialists in the population of this urban kingdom. The ruling family was Catholic and was actually the Junior line of the Wettin dynasty. The senior faction remained primarily in Thuringia and became subdivided over time. So you had what were sometimes called the "Saxon Duchies" even though they were primarily not duchies nor Saxon. They were independent entities such as Saxe – Meiningen or Saxe-Coberg – Gotha. There was a Grand Duchy called Saxe Weimar Eisenach which renamed itself to the Duchy of Saxony. Prussia had a province named Saxony. This was often called Prussian Saxony. All of those people could and would at times call themselves Saxon.

While all of the other Germanic kingdoms fought against Prussia in 1866 alongside Austria, the kingdoms did not lose much territory. However, the Kingdom of Hanover was annexed by Prussia and ceased to exist. There was a lot of anti-Prussian feeling in parts of Hanover and Braunschweig as the Duke of Cumberland was disenfranchised. They were however not Saxon.

A further confusion comes because of the military conventions that were signed mostly at the end of the war against Austria. What most of these conventions did was to incorporate various national contingents into the Prussian army. As a result, soldiers from Mecklenburg, for instance, were integrated into the Prussian army and often called Prussian by non-Germans.

This is a fascinating subject mostly ignored in any English language text. It seems as though often the English language books try to find easy common denominator's that really do not work.