The German Question, Part Forty-Two

"Revolution...Sort Of" Part Two

Street demonstrations in Berlin (the capital of Prussia) brought about counter measures from the Prussian government, which led to armed conflict in the barricaded streets. There were hundreds of casualties, including many dead. The Prussian military was pulled back and the king, Friedrich Wilhelm IV, promised a constitution with some basic rights and an elected Prussian assembly, and he offered support for a "national" German parliament.

Matters calmed down for awhile, and a National Assembly ("Nationalversammlung," in German) met at the "Paulskirche" (Paul's Church, which still exists, although it virtually had to be rebuilt after destruction in World War II) in Frankfurt to attempt to work out details for the establishment of a truly unified German nation with a constitution. The Archduke of Austria, Johann,* was made a sort of temporary leader, and eventually the Prussian king was offered the position of "emperor," but he turned it down, as the position was not being offered to him by the German princes, whom he viewed as the legitimate representatives of the German states, but rather by constitutionalists and revolutionaries. The assembly battled over all sorts of things, but the main problems were about how a united Germany would be ruled; that is, by an emperor (Kaiser, in German) whose position would then be hereditary (passed on to sons or other eligible relatives), or by election. The real main issue was the question of Austria. Over the centuries Habsburg rulers had acquired so many non-German territories, that many Germans saw this as unacceptable for inclusion in a "German" nation. Would the Habsburgs separate their German lands from their Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Italian, and a multitude of other ethnic groups? The issue was thornier than a brier patch, with the inclusion of German Austria being called the "Grossdeutschland" (Large Germany) solution, and the exclusion of Austria being called for some strange reason the "Kleindeutschland" (Small Germany) solution (Hmm, what a coincidence! "Large and small"). The "Small Germany" solution would have given German leadership to Prussia, since Austria would have been outside the new nation. This issue cannot easily be seen without now moving on to what was happening in the Habsburg lands during the Revolution of 1848.

In "Part One," we learned that Germans took to the streets prompted by the abdication of the French king. In Vienna, the demonstrations brought about the resignation of long time Habsburg adviser and leading government minister, Klemens von Metternich. The Habsburg emperor,** Ferdinand I, in an effort to stabilize the situation, appointed new government ministers, in theory, men more acceptable to the general populace, as they didn't have the very conservative reputations of their predecessors. The problems grew, however, as Austria's non-German possessions began to go into revolt. The Hungarians wanted a separate country, but with the Habsburg ruler as their king. Similar feelings were expressed by Polish and (Western) Ukrainians (also known as Ruthenians) minorities,***and many of the Habsburg Italian possessions wanted to join a united Italian nation.**** In Bohemia/Moravia, where Czechs were a significant majority, but often dominated by the German minority (which was largely middle class), the German population wanted the region to be a part of any new German national state, but this was based not upon the ethnic make up of the area, but rather the historical fact that Bohemia had long been a part (and a significant part, at that) of the old German Empire. The Czechs saw this very differently, desiring a separate Czech nation. Slovaks, close kin to the Czechs, were in a different struggle. Hungarian moves toward independence from the Austrian Empire left the Slovaks in a position of being dominated by the Hungarians, as what we now call "Slovakia," was considered a part of Hungary in those times. Further unrest developed in the Serbian, Croat and Rumanian areas, but this unrest was largely directed, as was the Slovak uprising, against the Hungarians, which in turn then helped the Austrians against the Hungarians. ***** Put simply, it was a MESS!

So all of these "ethnic" disputes/uprisings were going on within the Austrian Empire at the same time that German Austria****** was in the midst of its own revolution, and all of these events were in some stage of development/occurrence while the National Assembly was meeting to decide German nationhood. If the Hungarians had succeeded in breaking away from Austria's hold, and they made the strongest moves of the non-German regions to do so, this may well have led to success for some or all of the other non-German areas. With such a development, the "Large Germany, Small Germany" question would have been solved, and German Austria's inclusion in any new German nation pretty much assured.

One more "part" in this segment to tie up some things.... (A Word History is below the notes)

* Archduke Johann was a member of the Habsburg family, but not the leading member. He was more liberal in outlook than most of the family, thus putting him in opposition to many of the other Habsburgs at times. 

** The Habsburg ruler, Franz, had declared Austria to be the "Austrian Empire" a few decades earlier (1804), thus making the ruler an "emperor," by title. The Habsburg "emperor" was simultaneously German emperor, as the German Empire (Holy Roman Empire) was still in existence at that time.

*** (Western) Ukrainians/Ruthenians were not typically Eastern Orthodox, as many other Ukrainians were. They had their own Christian denomination, Uniate/Ukrainian Catholic, which still had ties to Rome.

**** Like the Germans, the Italians did not have a truly united nation at that time, but rather a number of independent "states." Also like the Germans, they were trying to establish a modern nation. In those times, unlike what we think of today, "Italy" was really just a geographic term, not a term for a nation.

***** To keep all of this manageable, suffice it to say that these various uprisings in the ethnic territories failed, although the Hungarians came closest to success. Austria's army and most army commanders remained loyal to the Habsburgs, giving the monarchy a distinct advantage over the rebels. Further, the various ethnic factions often had fears of one another, allowing the Austrians to use the dissension to their advantage. While these rebellions failed at that time, the contentiousness remained, and we will be dealing with it again shortly.

****** I'm using the term "German Austria" to mean essentially what had been the traditional German state of the old German Empire, and to show a distinction between this area and the non-German areas of the "Austrian Empire," as it was this "state" that most Germans wanted included in a new German nation, and not the other parts of the Austrian Empire, although there were supporters for the entire Austrian Empire to enter a new German nation.

WORD HISTORY:
Pretzel-This goes back to Indo European "mregh-u" or "mrehu," which had the notion of "short." (Note: Remember that the Indo European forms have been reconstructed by linguists, and while you may wonder how a modern word beginning with "p" could have come from a root beginning with "m" or "mr," just as today, not all sounds were made exactly the same by everyone. Even with so many people having at least some schooling in more modern times, and radio and television having given us "examples" to follow, pronunciation differences remain, and in ancient times, education was much more scant.) The Indo European form gave Old Greek "brakhion," which meant "upper arm;" that is, the "shorter" part of the arm, compared to the longer lower forearm. Latin took on the Greek word as "bracchium," but as "arm," in general. From this Latin later developed "brachitellum," which apparently meant "little arms, branches." Old High German took the word from Latin as "brezitella," which then later became "brezel/prezel" (there are those sound/pronunciation variances again; in this case "b" and "p"), and eventually "Brezel/Bretzel" in modern German (all German nouns are capitalized, and the "z" is pronounced "ts," as when we say the plural of hit; hits.). There are many different pronunciations in German dialects, including "Brezn" in Bavaria/Austria, except for Vienna ("Wienerisch") where it is "Brezerl," and around Heidelberg they say "Bretschl," but there are other pronunciations, too. German bakers used the crossed dough patterns to simulate "folded arms," supposedly for religious purposes; thus the relation to the Latin form for "arm." English got the word from German in the mid 1800s, if not earlier.

Paying The Piper-Part Seven-Income Gap Biggest Ever

The U.S. Census Bureau yesterday (9/28) released the latest information on incomes in the U.S. It shows more disturbing trends, as the rich continue to rake it in, and the poorest Americans continue to fall behind even further. Those in the middle also dropped. Here are the basics of the latest info. If interested in more info, you can always go to http://www.census.gov/ (under income topics):

The top 20% of earners, those making at least $100,000 (and don't forget, those in the top one and a half percent make like a million or more) took in almost half of all income earned. On the other hand, the bottom 20% took in less than 3 and a half percent of all income. Those in the middle seem to have slipped a bit.

I really have no problem with people who make a hundred grand, or two hundred grand. Good for them! Of course, it DOES matter how they made it, but that's another subject. Okay Republicans, you should know what's coming.... We have Republicans in Congress pushing to extend tax cuts for the very top earners in the country. Those cuts were initially presented by and signed into law by President George W. Bush in two installments: 2001 & 2003 (and passed by Congress). Personally, I believe it would be far better if we had another one or two income tax brackets for higher incomes, rather than lumping everyone together who makes 200 grand (individuals) or 250 grand (couples) and higher. Its the "higher" part that I'm more concerned with. Those "higher" income people make anywhere from a half million up to amounts none of us can imagine. The idea that these folks need tax cuts is absurd. As I mentioned a couple of articles ago, I know I beat up on Republicans a lot, but they seem to have a soft spot for multi-millionaires, even indicating how tough it is for such high income people. Republicans actually have some ideas I agree with, but their desire to do anything and everything for VERY wealthy people troubles me deeply, and it should trouble you, too, unless you're making a cool million or more a year. I'm too old for much of this stuff to matter to me, but I find that I cannot sit still and watch what is happening to this country, which has just been handed over lock, stock, and barrel to the wealthiest people and interests in the country, and just to be fair, not without some help from Democrats. Republicans and Democrats, alike....THINK!!!

If you notice some of the ads on television, "Its a bad idea to put any kind of tax on oil companies." Did you see who is paying for those ads? The petroleum industry! They have lots of money, and they are willing to spend a chunk of it to keep their treasures. They're entitled to run those ads, but other Americans need to pay attention to WHO is trying to scare the hell out 'em! And that's perhaps the most troubling thing of all to me; Americans don't pay attention to these matters, and the "interests" know it. I just saw a caption online that indicated that in one poll, only 6 in 10 Americans knew that Joe Biden is Vice President of the United States. So, forty percent of Americans don't know who their own VP is!!! C'mon folks! Americans disturbingly seem not to know what's going on around them, and in this age of "globalization," that's downright dangerous. Other countries are pulling ahead of us in all sorts of education matters. The petroleum industry ads don't scare me, but this stuff does!

WORD HISTORY:
Gap-This word, related to "gape" and "yawn," ^ goes back to an Indo European base "ghei," which had the notion of "to open the mouth, to make an opening." This gave Old Germanic "gaponan," with the same general meaning. Whether Old English had a form of the word "gap" is not known, but it is "assumed" that many Old English words were unrecorded, as the common people could not usually write, and there are forms of "gap" in other West Germanic languages, and the old forms of the Germanic ancestors of "gap," "gape" and "yawn" were so close, it is at times difficult to separate them (Low German Saxon, for instance, has "jappen" and "gapen" for "yawn," but both also mean  "gape.") Apparently, English borrowed "gap" from Old Norse (a North Germanic language, English is West Germanic), seemingly in the 1200s, and kept the general Old Norse meaning, "chasm." Of course, if English did already have a word of its own, then the Norse relative most certainly reinforced the English word.

^ The English ancestor of modern "yawn" was spelled with a "g," not a "y," as its German relative, "gähnen," and its Dutch relative, "geeuw," still do.

The German Question, Part Forty-One

Very slightly updated "Word History" 8/19/2015

"Revolution....Sort Of" Part One

By February of 1848, the French monarchy had tried ever so hard to suppress any sort of freedom of assembly in France, even forbidding many social events.* This brought about large public demonstrations against the government and monarchy, especially in Paris. There was sporadic violence, barricades were actually set up in the streets, and a number of people were killed. This only added fuel to the fire, with a mass of citizens marching near the residence of the French king, Louis Philippe, who decided to abdicate. This event sent Germans into action, and there were large public demonstrations in Vienna. This led to the resignation of Fürst (Prince, see "Word History" below) Klemens von Metternich, a long time prominent German/Austrian diplomat and chief Austrian government minister.**/*** Metternich had long been viewed by many Germans as too conservative, if not downright reactionary, in protecting the interests of the nobility.

Demonstrations and uprisings took place in various German states, with all of these events occurring in 1848 (some sputtered to a stop, only to reignite a few months later). Hmm, maybe that's why they're collectively called "The Revolution of 1848." Ya think? Must be! Anyway, everything is far too involved to deal with here, but certain events are worth noting. Once again, the general motivation of the "revolution" was German unity for the establishment of nationhood, along with a constitution that guaranteed basic rights to citizens. Second, Austria's centuries' old dominant role in German affairs faced a serious challenge from Prussia to oust Austria from that position. Southern German states favored their fellow southern state, Austria, for leadership of Germany, not only because of geography, but also because of religion (the south, including Austria, was largely Catholic), with tradition also playing a part (most, but not all, of the dialects were very similar, too). During the "revolution," while both Prussia and Austria had their hands full (to be covered in "Part Two"), Prussia used its military to help halt an uprising in Baden (in southwest Germany). This caused rulers (all nobles) of the southern states to wonder if perhaps Prussia was more to be counted upon than Austria to help them keep control of their states. This was the beginning of a dramatic shift in southern opinion towards Prussia.

To be continued.... (A Word History is below the notes)

* In an effort to get around the French law, citizens had at times used the cover of "social events," or gatherings, to vent political dissatisfaction. The government saw through the guise and issued proclamations banning virtually any large gatherings.

** For Americans, we call our governmental department heads, "secretaries," as in Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense, but in Europe, there is more of a tendency to use the term "minister," which we Americans use more in a religious sense. Do I hear an "Amen?"

*** Remember, each German "state" had its own government, as they were in essence independent countries held loosely together by the umbrella organization of the German Confederation. Metternich was born in Koblenz, a city located on the Rhine River, but through a number of events, not the least of which was an advantageous marriage, he first became involved in Austrian, and thus overall German, political affairs. Metternich married the granddaughter of former Habsburg official Reichsfürst von Kaunitz-Rietberg (Reichsfürst =Imperial Prince, as this was when the German Empire was still in existence). 

WORD HISTORY:
First-This goes back to the Indo European root "per," which seems to have had variants "por," "pro," or "pre." Whatever the case, the general meaning was "before, in front of," as in "Proto Germanic;" that is, "the Germanic language that came before others." In Old (Proto) Germanic, the "p" became an "f" sound, giving Germanic the base "fur/for," also with the same meaning. This then gave Old English "fore," and its superlative form "fyrst," prior to the modern spelling. It is very common in its various forms in the Germanic languages, and German has "Fürst," Low German Saxon has "Föörst," West Frisian has the now little used "foarst," and Dutch has "vorst," all meaning "prince;" that is, "first, or foremost ruler." (If you have been following the above series on the Germans, recall that the rulers of the various German states were collectively known as "the German princes," regardless of their proper titles, such as king, duke, or archduke.) Norwegian and Danish have "først," Swedish has "första," and Icelandic has "fyrsta."

The German Question, Part Forty

"Song Of The Germans" (Das Lied der Deutschen)

More and more Germans wanted a true national state; that is, a unified nation,* and they wanted certain basic civil liberties for themselves within that nation. Notice I did not say "all Germans," or even "most Germans." The fact is, no one really knows just how many Germans favored the above goals, since public opinion polls were still in the future, along with the accompanying disputes of opinion polls and, of course, the the term "margin of error." Then again, public opinion polls could not have existed, because the police and military forces were under the total control of the nobility, and that sort of shoots giving an honest opinion in the rear end. One thing is pretty clear however; the nobility wanted the status quo to continue; after all, they controlled the individual German states, and nobles of varying ranks owned most of the land within the German territories. Why would they want anything to change? But things had changed, as gone were the days for most Germans when average citizens were dependent upon their local noble for protection, food, and shelter; that is, the system of "feudalism." In fact, in many ways the situation had reversed, as the ruling nobles needed the support of the populace for the various wars in which they engaged. That public support meant taxes to pay for military operations and soldiers to fill the ranks of the armies.

The German intellectuals provided the boost for the liberal ideas of the American and French revolutions, where individual citizens had basic rights.** The ruling nobles chose to appeal to their subjects' regional loyalties rather than to the idea of a united German nation, as any notion of unification would have threatened a lessening of power for the individual nobles; likewise with any granting of basic rights to citizens, such as freedom of the press, free speech, and a publicly elected representative body. With such freedoms there might actually have been public debate about governing affairs where people could speak their own true beliefs, something that would have undoubtedly scared the crowns right off the heads of their rulers.

One such German intellectual was Hoffmann von Fallersleben. In the late 1790s, composer Joseph Hayden had written music to celebrate the birthday of German Emperor ("Kaiser" in German) Franz II. By 1841, von Fallersleben had written lyrics to this music to inspire Germans to achieve true nationhood. Later, when the Nazis came to power in the 1930s, the first verse of the song came to take on the much more sinister meaning of German world domination, something unintended by von Fallersleben and German liberals of the post-Napoleon era. The song, incorrectly known to many non-Germans during the Hitler era simply as "Germany Over All" ("Deutschland Über Alles"), was meant by von Fallersleben to convey the need for Germans to lay aside their regional loyalties and to put "Germany above all" of these feelings and "above all else in the world," so as to unite in a true nation. Von Fallersleben also laid out in that first verse his concept of what the boundaries of that united German nation should be; again something the Nazis later exploited.****  Those boundaries very much tie in with this series on defining "who is a German?"

Von Fallersleben used these following general boundaries as his concept for a united German nation: In the west Fallersleben simply made reference to the Maas River (Meuse more commonly used in English, Maas in both German and Dutch). The Meuse is a big river, much of which lies within modern France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, and even in Fallersleben's times the area of the Meuse covered territories where French, Flemish and Dutch were overwhelmingly spoken, not German. In his defense, Fallersleben may not have meant ANY of these lands, but rather the small area around the modern Dutch-German border, which seems likely, since Fallersleben was a GERMAN nationalist, not a conquest seeking tyrant. (The "German dialect" in that area is VERY close to Dutch, and people on both sides of the border can understand one another, but remember, Dutch is closely related to German, especially to Low German, which is the basis for the German dialect in that region.)

In the east Fallersleben mentions only the "Memel River" (also known as the Neman/Niemen in other languages). The river lies in what was then the northeastern German territory of Prussia. There was a German majority present, but perhaps with small local Lithuanian majorities in certain rural areas near the Lithuanian border. Other than this mention, Fallersleben ignores other parts of Eastern Europe, which certainly seems to confirm his intention of including German areas, rather than non-German lands ruled or once ruled by Germans, like for instance, Bohemia (Czech majority), or areas where Germans were distinct minorities (like in Hungary).

In the south Fallersleben mentions the "Etsch River" ("Adige" in Italian) which runs through Tirol. In Fallersleben's time, Tirol (sometimes in English written as "Tyrol") was a Habsburg land of Austria, and heavily German in character, although with Italian majorities in some areas, especially in its far southern reaches.

In the north Fallersleben notes "the Belt," which is a group of islands and a strait in the Baltic Sea off the coasts of (modern) Germany and Denmark. Inland lies a territory called Schleswig (Slesvig in Danish), which had a very mixed German and Danish population, and was under Danish rule. Much of the area was German, and the Danes more or less acknowledged that fact, but a few parts were definitely Danish in character. This area will reappear in our story a bit later here.

Fallersleben's song is important because he attempted, however vaguely, to lay out a geographical concept of a modern German nation. His third verse touts his and liberals' basic civil rights of  "justice and freedom for the German Fatherland," which Germans should "strive for fraternally with heart and hand." Further, "unity, justice and freedom are the pledge of good fortune," and finally, "Blossom German Fatherland." These are not the words of some right wing maniac, but the words of a man who wants his country united, and with rights for all.*****

(A Word History is below the notes)

* The existing German Confederation of the post-Napoleon era was not truly a "national" governing system. The individual states were really like independent countries, loosely associated with one another, like in matters of trade, with each state's governing noble being totally in control of his respective state.

** It should not be forgotten that the governing system of England (and later of "Great Britain," when Scotland, Wales, etc were added) had been evolving for centuries, with the king's (or queen's) powers becoming more and more limited; that is, it gradually became a "constitutional monarchy." We Americans sometimes forget that prior to the Revolutionary War, while the American colonists focused their anger at King George III, it was Parliament that approved or initiated many of the laws that riled so many in the colonies.

*** The lyrics were just waiting for the super nationalistic Nazis to later exploit: "Germany, Germany above (or 'over,' as the Nazis saw it) all. Above (Over) everything in the world."

**** Throughout this series I've been gradually showing how some areas separated from "Germany," a term I'm using here in a very broad sense. When Fallersleben wrote his lyrics, he certainly was within the broad bounds of what many people of those times, including many non-Germans, saw as "Germany," since he used a linguistic/ethnic basis for his borders (with some exceptions, see above text), but with large exceptions, like the German part of Switzerland, which he "seems" not to have included. That is not to say that his general boundaries weren't controversial, as they were, since his borders were so general that they left much open to interpretation; thus I said "seems" to have left out the German part of Switzerland. (See above in the main text) All of this seeks to answer "The German Question;" who/what is a German?

***** The third verse in the official national anthem of Germany today. The first verse, having been so perverted by the Nazis, is no longer used, and it has not been used since the end of World War Two.

WORD HISTORY:
Wurst-As in "Bratwurst," was borrowed into English from German in the mid to late 1800s (I found different dates). It is the generic word for "sausage" in German. There is some disagreement about its ancestry, with some linguists feeling it goes back to the Indo European root "wer," which had the notion of "turning, changing," and this then gave Old Germanic "werth," which then gave Old English the now obsolete verb "worth," which means "become" (German has the related "werden," which means "to become"). Now, this makes sense, since sausages are turned and twisted when put into casings to seal them. Another side feels that "wurst" goes back to the similar Indo European root "wers," which meant "confuse, mix up." Of course this also makes sense, since sausage is made by mixing meat with various seasonings. Actually (and this is just my idea here), it may be that "wer" and "wers" are related in Indo European, since when you mix something, you turn it over and over. By the way, "wers" is the ultimate source of our word "war," a "mixed up, or confused state of affairs." What ever the case, Old High German seems to have had "wurst" or "wursti," which then became "worst" is some dialects, before the spelling "wurst" became fixed and carried into modern times in standard German. Related words in other Germanic languages: Dutch and Low German have "worst" and West Frisian has "woarst." 

The German Question, Part Thirty-Nine

"Aftermath of Napoleon" Conclusion

For quite some time, right up into and through the end of World War Two, the Germans have been noted for their military prowess. Some of this is exaggerated, as prior to true German unification, a point which we are now approaching in this series, not all German states had efficient military forces. Some of you may recall from your history class days, that during the American Revolution, the British brought German troops from "Hessen" to help suppress the rebellion in the Colonies, but they didn't really perform well in America. Certainly part of the reason for their poor performance was that they were mercenaries, and therefore they weren't fighting for anything except money. For most people, it's one thing to risk your life for your own country, but it's another matter entirely to risk your life purely for money.

The competitive situation between the German states, as well as, powerful non-German neighbors; typically, France (west), Russia (east), Sweden (north), and the Turks (south) out of the Balkans, made having viable military forces pretty much of a necessity for survival for many German states. Remember, even when the Holy Roman Empire (the German Empire) was in existence, the German emperor was actually dependent upon the states to provide "imperial forces," a situation which increasingly fell to Austria as the centuries passed. The Prussian kings finally began to organize and train their armies in an effort to keep their (initially small) kingdom from being nibbled away by other German states. As Prussian forces improved, Prussia became a northern competitor with Austria (southern) for influence within the German Empire. This all ended when Napoleon defeated both Prussia and Austria on the battlefield, thus giving him control of Germany. This control proved only to be temporary, as some Prussian officers saw the need to reform Prussia's army, having learned some lessons from their walloping by Napoleon, and indeed it was Prussia that helped lead the Germans in their effort to remove Napoleon's hold over Germany.

This era began the march to a time when many people in Europe and America saw the Germans as having disciplined and efficient armies. Prussia established military schools and a "general staff" composed of highly trained military officers, whose whole life revolved around military matters and what might be termed "the science of warfare." These officers studied and developed plans and theories, not only in what most people see as "strategy and tactics" for the battlefield, but also in those most necessary functions not considered by the average lay person, like how to supply forces in the field and how to keep a pool of trained replacements available to step in for the inevitable casualties. All of this "devotion to duty" gradually came to personify "German military efficiency," but it certainly wasn't true of all Germans, as for instance, Austria did not reform its military in the same way as Prussia, a failure which eventually brought about Austria's defeat, a point we will be dealing with shortly.*

Napoleon exposed how weak the German Empire really was, since the hundreds of German states at that time were not under any central government, but rather the true power was in the hands of the individual states. By the time of Napoleon, the German emperor was merely a figurehead, and even in that role he could not rally Germans in a united effort to keep the French from overrunning German territory. Without reforms and giving ALL Germans a stake in a truly national government and a united country, German unity remained elusive. The forces of reform were gathering strength, but could they bring about changes in a system dominated by nobles of many titles?

* Austria's military had numerous problems, not the least of which was that the Habsburg possessions  contained so many non-Germans.

WORD HISTORY:
Federation-This goes back to the Indo European root "bhoidh," a variant of "bheidh," which had the notion of "trust." This gave the Latin offshoot "foedus," which meant "treaty, covenant, league" (that which is formed and based upon trust), as the "bh" of Indo European was rendered as 'f' in Latin. A verb was derived from "foedus" as "foederare," meaning "to agree to a treaty or covenant," and this brought about the Late Latin noun "foederatio," meaning "alliance, two or more nations or states bound by treaty." This was taken by French as "fédération," with the same meaning and English borrowed the word in the mid 1600s, and by the early 1700s it took on the meaning "a state entity formed by treaty among independent states." Later it took on the broader meaning of "groups (of varying types, not just government) banding together in agreement to form a single entity."

Paying The Piper-Part Six-Incomes Fall, Poverty Rises

Yesterday, the Census Bureau released figures showing the nation's poverty rate climbed to 14.3% (figures go through 2009), the highest since 1994. There are now 43.6 million Americans living poverty, the most since the 1960s. The number of people without health insurance also increased, presumably as businesses tried to cut costs during the economic downturn, and the new health care law doesn't take full effect until 2014, if it survives Republican attempts to repeal or kill it by refusing to fund certain parts of it.*

While I don't believe George W. Bush is a bad person, his economic policies, and those policies that have been put into place in the last three decades have taken a TERRIBLE toll on many Americans. Newly released figures show that the median income for Americans fell nearly 5% between 2000 and 2009.** Of course incomes for the top 20% rose, and how much do you want to bet that the increases at the very top 1 to 2% were higher than most?***

I've noted here before that "Morning Joe," on cable channel MSNBC, is one of my favorite shows. Today, host Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, and none other than conservative Republican commentator Pat Buchanan talked about these very figures I've mentioned above. Buchanan said that he has had "big differences with his party" over many of the economic policies of the last few decades, most put into place by Republicans, although at times with help from some Democrats. Buchanan threw some figures out, and I have no idea how accurate these figures are, but he said that during Bush's eight years in office, more than 50,000 manufacturing plants closed in America! As a result, he stated that 6 million manufacturing jobs ("the highest income jobs for working class Americans," he added) disappeared, with many of these jobs going to China. Scarborough mentioned "three decades of American decline." Remember, these were two Republicans talking about this, not two Democrats.

If you're a Republican, God bless ya! We need differing points of view, as neither political party has a monopoly on good ideas, and certainly neither has a monopoly on virtue. I just hope you'll go look into that mirror and say to yourself, "I think we've got a problem here." That's a start! Don't be in denial! What is terribly troubling to me now is to hear Republican officeholders acting as if they had nothing to do with creating the economic situation this country is in. It's as if they learned nothing! That's a recipe for more decline. (A Word History is below the notes)

Related previous article:
http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2007/06/you-wont-need-time-machine.html

* The health care bill (now law) was not great, but it was a start. A number of Republican members of Congress and some Republican candidates are indicating they will try to repeal or "de-fund" the health care law, if Republicans take over Congress in the November elections. The Republican senatorial candidate in Alaska (Joe Miller) has noted that with a Democratic president, no repeal will be possible, as the president will veto any such legislation, but Miller advises that he will aim to "de-fund" the law, thus effectively killing it.

** See the Wall Street Journal for today, the front page article, "Lost Decade for American Income," by Conor Dougherty and Sara Murray.

*** I'm not against people making money, even lots of money, but in my lifetime I've found that most Americans are pretty sensible. We want businesses to make money, we understand it, we get it! There will always be those who resent someone who made a dime off of them, but they are in the distinct minority, probably like 2%. The other side of the coin is, however, Americans also know when they see excess, and we've seen excess. There has been a tremendous transfer of wealth to the upper incomes, and they were already, well, the upper incomes.

WORD HISTORY:
Poverty-This word goes back to the Indo European root "pau," which meant "little, few," and which then spawned the Latin offshoot "paupertas." (Latin is an Indo European language related to English, but further down the family tree.) Old French, a Latin-based language, continued with "poverte," and English then acquired the word from French in the late 1100s. Initially it was spelled as the French word, "poverte," but later took on the modern spelling. It is closely related to both "poor" and "pauper." In Old English we used a form of the base "earm" to relate words connected to poor and poverty, and in our close relative German, they still have "arm"(not the same as the body part, which is spelled the same in German), which is obviously close to our old word.

The German Question, Part Thirty-Eight

"Aftermath of Napoleon" Part Two

Here are more of the changes brought to the map of Europe by the Congress of Vienna ("Wiener Kongress," in German):

First, in "Part One," I inadvertently left out another gain by Prussia; the part of Pomerania that had been occupied by Sweden (most of Pomerania was already part of Prussia). Pomerania was a territory in the north along the Baltic Sea.

While the Netherlands was no longer connected with Germany, since it had been a part of the German Empire for centuries, I thought I'd mention here that the Netherlands, and much of what is now Belgium (then called "the Austrian Netherlands," as it had been a Habsburg possession), were formed into a single entity called "The United Kingdom of the Netherlands," under the Dutch king. It wasn't until 1830 that the southern part, then called "Belgium" (actually Kingdom of Belgium), was granted independence.

Luxembourg had dynastic connections with Prussia, but it was divided from Prussia by other German lands. A German land, "Nassau," was a possession of the Dutch king, but the territory was located essentially east of the Rhine River, smack dab in German territory. It was decided that the Prussian and Dutch monarchs would swap these territories, giving each easier access to his own land. While Luxembourg became a personal possession of the Dutch king, it remained a part of Germany (more precisely of the German Confederation, see below).

Austria gained Tirol (a German territory, much of which lies in the Alps, with the far southern part having some local Italian majorities),* Salzburg (of "Sound of Music" fame), some lands in the Balkans, some lands in Italy,** some lands from Russia (but contiguous with other Habsburg lands in eastern Europe).

There were various other border adjustments to some of the German states (and other countries, too), but one of the more important changes was the establishment of the "German Confederation" ("Deutscher Bund") to replace the old empire, and thus keep some semblance of German unity. Instead of the hundreds, and at times even thousands, of German states that constituted the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the German Confederation had only thirty-eight.*** In place of the former parliament, the Reichstag, there was the "Bundesversammlung" ("Federal Assembly"), which met in Frankfurt am Main, with Austria holding the presidency. The "delegates" were not elected by a vote of the people, but rather were typically appointed by the ruling prince (or whatever title used in each individual state) of each state. The French Revolution (and America's founding as an independent nation) had spread ideas of democracy throughout much of Europe, and in truth, the German ruling princes (as they were collectively known, regardless of each actual title) tried to keep a lid on such sentiments; thus the Federal Assembly was not democratically elected.

To be continued..... (A Word History is below the notes)

* Tirol had been a Habsburg possession, but when Napoleon defeated the Austrians in 1805, the territory was handed over to Napoleon's ally, Bavaria (a member of the French sponsored "Confederation of the Rhine;" see previous article). The local population eventually rebelled, led by Andreas Hofer, a famous Austrian/German hero. The rebels won many victories, taking back much of the territory, but the odds against them were too great, as besides Bavarian troops, Napoleon had French troops and troops from the Kingdom of Italy (a Napoleon created state, mainly based in what is now northern Italy, with guess who as king? NAPOLEON). Hofer was eventually captured, tried and executed by firing squad, with Napoleon supposedly telling his subordinates, "Give him a fair trial, then shoot him." (What would he have gotten with an unfair trial?)

** At that time, Italy was not a united nation, but rather a number of kingdoms and principalities, much like the German lands.

*** Like with the old empire, the number of states varied from time to time, but unlike with the empire, the number didn't vary much.

WORD HISTORY:
(After)math-This is a compound of after + math, and here we are only going to be concerned with the second part, "math." I'll deal with "after" in a separate history later. This is not "math," as in 3+3=ah, don't tell me....now to the fingers of the other hand....let's see...6! This goes back to the Indo European root "me(h)" (not connected to our word "me"), with the notion of "cutting down grass or grain." It is closely related to "mow," as in "mow the lawn." The Indo European root developed into "maetha/metha" in its Old Germanic offspring, which then gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "maeth," later changed to "math." German, a close relative of English, has "Mahd," which means "mowing," and also "a swathe cut through grass/or agricultural plants, and that which has been mowed," and Frisian once had "meth." So "aftermath" indicates "the result of mowing, that which is left after mowing." The modern (figurative) meaning of "aftermath" came about in the late 1400s; that is, "the results or consequences of an event."

The German Question, Part Thirty-Seven

Just ever so slightly edited 8/15/2015


"Aftermath of Napoleon" Part One

When Napoleon was first sent into exile in 1814, representatives of many of the major European powers assembled in Vienna to work out the many border issues left in the wake of Napoleon's fall. By the time final agreements of this Congress of Vienna, as it was called, were signed in 1815, Napoleon was again on the march, after having escaped from his captivity on the island of Elba (off the western Italian coast). His final defeat came only days AFTER the agreements had been signed.

The Congress of Vienna changed the map of Europe, and the changes were far too numerous to enumerate here, but many dealt with the German states and what to do with them now that the Holy Roman Empire (the German Empire) had been dissolved. The negotiations and diplomatic twists and turns are also far too complex for this article. The Napoleonic creation, the Duchy of Warsaw, was divided between Russia and Prussia, with Russia receiving the largest portion (including Warsaw), but with Prussia receiving the territory in and around the city of Posen (Poznan, in Polish). This area was heavily Polish in ethnicity, with a German minority of about 25%.* Prussia also received a large chunk of Saxony (one of the German states),** Danzig,*** Westphalia (another German state), and the Rhineland, much of which had been occupied and then annexed by France during Napoleon's rule.**** Prussia came out of Vienna much larger.

To be continued.... (Two Word Histories are below the notes)

* Even after a hundred years of Prussian/German rule, about two-thirds of the population still considered themselves to be Polish.

** Saxony had been known previously as the "Electorate of Saxony" (" Kurfürstentum Sachsen," in German); that is, it had a vote in the election for German emperors, but it was given the elevated status of "Kingdom of Saxony" ("Königreich Sachsen," in German), by Napoleon. The ruler of Saxony, with the new title, "King Friedrich August I," allied himself to Napoleon. Previous family ties to the kings of Poland, which by then no longer existed (it had been partitioned out of existence-See previous parts of this series for details), had Napoleon choose Friedrich August as head of the French created "Duchy of Warsaw." The king's strong ties to Napoleon made it very difficult for him later, when other German states banded together to drive Napoleon out of German territory. He tried to have it both ways by establishing ties with his fellow German rulers, but by also remaining as an ally of Napoleon. Napoleon demanded that the king put Saxon (and Polish) military forces into the field against the other German and allied armies, but in the end, most of the Saxon forces defected and joined their fellow Germans against Napoleon. During the Congress of Vienna, the king's ties to Napoleon did him no good, and there's no question those ties helped negotiators decide to award part of Saxony to Prussia, although Friedrich August remained on the throne of the reduced kingdom, probably more out of Austrian concern that Prussia, its arch competitor in German affairs, would become too strong.

*** When the Holy Roman Empire was dissolved, Napoleon had Danzig declared a "free city," separate from other German lands. Interestingly, this sort of pattern was used after World War One when Danzig was made a "free city," under the League of Nations. I'll deal much more with this later.

**** The Rhineland area in question was overwhelmingly German in population, but the French had long coveted the region for its many resources and industries, and they sought to make the Rhine River France's eastern boundary (as they had in Alsace), regardless of ethnic make up of the area (just as we can also say how German states took over areas often with Slavic or Hungarian majorities along their eastern borders).

WORD HISTORY:
Dale-This goes back to Indo European "dhel," which had the notion of "curve;" thus also, "valley." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "dalam/dalom," which meant "valley, gorge." This then gave Old English "dael," with the same meaning, and this then became "dale." The other Germanic languages have: German "Tal," Low German Saxon "Daal," West Frisian "delling," Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Icelandic all have "dal." All these forms mean "valley, dale," in the other Germanic languages too.

Dell-Like its close relative "dale," this goes back to Indo European "dhel" (notion of  "curve," thus "valley"). The Old Germanic base "dal," then gave Old Germanic "daljo." This then gave Old English "dell," which later became "delle," before reverting to "dell." Other Germanic relatives include Dutch "delle" and German "Delle," with the meaning "depression, dent, hollow,"  A famous old childhood song is "The Farmer in the Dell."

The German Question, Part Thirty-Six

"German Liberation"

There were various coalitions formed by many of the states of Europe, including many German states (usually led by Austria and Prussia), which then went to war against Napoleon and his allies over the years, and I will not get into all of the wars and the multitude of individual battles fought on German territory during those times. There are, however, a couple of important events that I will briefly deal with. Napoleon defeated the Prussians, who were part of one of those coalitions I mentioned, in 1806, bringing about the occupation of Berlin* and forcing the Prussian king, Friedrich Wilhelm III, to set up his government in the Prussian province of East Prussia for a time. In that same time frame, Napoleon reconstituted a "Polish state," called the "Duchy of Warsaw," which comprised a great deal of territory ceded by Poland to Prussia earlier in the various "Partitions of Poland."

The Prussian army was a total mess after defeat at the hands of Napoleon, but in one case, the Prussians managed to deprive the French of victory and simultaneously inspire some Germans to resist Napoleon.** This was at the town of Kolberg, located on the Baltic coast. The French besieged Kolberg for more than two months, and even heavy bombardment didn't bring a French victory. The Prussians held out until events elsewhere brought about a peace treaty. The military forces were led by someone who became famous in German history, Prussian officer August von Gneisenau.***

Gneisenau and Gerhard von Scharnhorst, another military man who became famous, pursued reform of the Prussian military. Already by that time, Scharnhorst had written a couple of manuals on military matters. The overall success by these two men helped foster a sense of German patriotism in the Prussian forces, and thus began the more "national" movement, not just Prussian, to liberate the German territories from French control. With Napoleon's famous defeat in Russia, the Germans rose up, inflicting a major defeat on the French near Leipzig, known to history as "The Battle Of Nations." Some of Napoleon's German allied states then defected to the cause to remove the French from German territory. The Confederation of the Rhine was abolished, and the defeated Napoleon (defeated by the coalition, which invaded France and forced Napoleon to abdicate) was exiled to the Italian island of Elba. Not long afterward, Napoleon escaped captivity, returned to France and mounted a new military campaign against his enemies. He was defeated at the famous "Battle of Waterloo" (located in modern Belgium, but then called the "United Netherlands") by British and Prussian forces, with the Prussians playing a decisive role near the end of the battle. Thus ended Napoleon. So what now for the Germans? (A Word History is below the notes)

* Napoleon went to visit the tomb of "Frederick the Great," which was in nearby Potsdam (about 15-20 miles south of Berlin). Napoleon so admired Frederick, that he ordered his officers to remove their hats in respect, and he "supposedly" said over the tomb, "If you were still alive, would we be here today?" (I've also seen it as, "If you were still alive, we would not be here today.") Whatever the case, the Nazis later made much of this Napoleonic visit to the tomb of one of Germany's most admired historical figures.

** It should be noted that there are numerous accounts from those times of German apathy about being subject to French dominance. In some areas actually occupied (or annexed) by the French, many French words crept into the German language (and the local dialects), displacing original Germanic words.

*** The Nazis, after seeing the potential for defeat in World War Two, began the production of an elaborate movie based on the historical siege of Kolberg, with the title simply, "Kolberg." While many Nazi themes echo through the scenes of the movie, the basic script has much based upon the actual historical events. No question though, it was a propaganda film with the main purpose of encouraging Germans to resist overwhelming odds. The movie is in color (I believe much of the color has been "restored," as it had faded a good deal), and it has English subtitles. The making of the film was considered so important by propagandist Joseph Goebbels and by Hitler himself, that thousands of soldiers, dressed in costumes from the 1800s, were made available for the battle scenes, even though German forces were under pressure in the real life war. There are some great battle scenes, for those who like such things. While many a German paid with their life for any kind of "defeatist" sentiment under the Nazis, it is interesting to note that the writing for the movie began in 1942, when Germany occupied much of Europe, and before Germany had suffered any of the major defeats which came later in the war. So, it looks to me as if the Nazis had a premonition of defeat, or at least of a long struggle. The movie was gradually filmed and edited over the next couple of years, only being released in the waning weeks of World War Two, in 1945.

WORD HISTORY: 
Foster-This word traces back to the Indo European base "pa," which meant "to feed, protect." In the Old Germanic offshoot the "p" became an "f" sound, giving Germanic the base "fo," (which also became the base of our word "food") and then "fostrom/fostra." This then gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "fostrian," with the meaning "to feed, to nourish." The more extended meaning, "to support a child in growing up," came along in the 1100s or 1200s. As part of this, "fostor" (as it was frequently spelled long ago, then later "fostren"), was coupled with other words to indicate someone "supporting a child, or helping to raise a child, who was not the actual parent, as Old English had "fostorfæder," "foster father." Its Germanic relatives' words are all centered around "food, fodder," and the specific meaning and usage of "foster" appears to only have developed in English.

Paying The Piper-Part Five-Trade With "China"

First, I am skipping ahead to "Part Five," but I will be backtracking to more about President Obama in Part Four.

This bill, H.R. 4444, established "normal" trade relations with China (mainland). It was sometimes referred to as the "China Trade Bill:"

Vote in House Of Representatives, May 24, 2000:
Yes: 237 (73 Democrats- 163 Republicans) No: 197 (135 Democrats- 59 Republicans-1 Independent) Not Voting: 1 (Republican)

Vote in Senate, September 19, 2000:
Yes: 83 (32 Democrats- 40 Republicans) No: 15 (7 Democrats- 7 Republicans-1 Independent) Not Voting: 2 (Democrats)

Signed into law by President Bill Clinton, October 10, 2000.

WORD HISTORY:
Vote-I found a reference to a possible Indo European base, but I found no other source supporting that base, so I'll leave that part open. "Vote" goes back to the Latin participle form of "vovere," which was "votus," and this gave Latin the noun form "votom/votum." The meaning of the Latin terms were "vow, promise, wish." In the mid 1500s, English borrowed the terms, but with the still prevalent meanings of modern English: "a wish for a desired candidate or issue" (noun) and the verb form, "to express a desire for a candidate or issue."

The German Question, Part Thirty-Five

"Napoleon Dominant"

With the various German states subdued, Napoleon set up "The Confederation Of The Rhine" ("Rheinbund" in German). This confederation eventually consisted of all but Austria, Prussia, part of Holstein (under Danish rule), and part of Pomerania (under Swedish rule).* The confederation was highly subservient to Napoleon, providing him with many men for his army. The German princes who ruled the individual states were always looking for ways to boost their personal territories, and Napoleon and the French were more than willing to adjust state borders of the larger German states at the expense of the smaller ones. Further, at times the French granted new titles to their German allies, as for instance with Bavaria, which they renamed as a "kingdom," thus making the Bavarian ruler a "king" (prior he had been called "Kurfürst," a "prince-elector;" that is, a prince entitled to vote on who became German emperor).

With France frequently at war with Great Britain, Napoleon had implemented a trade embargo against Britain. In order to enforce the embargo, Napoleon literally sent French troops into several northern German states along the North Sea coast (naturally there were a number of German port cities there), and formally annexed these areas to France. While so many Germans seemed subservient to the dominant Napoleon, there was opposition beginning to take shape.

* Holstein, still in existence today, was/is a German state in the northern part of Germany. As I've noted before in this series, the borders of all the various German entities mentioned do not necessarily match what the borders are today. A significant part of Holstein was under Danish rule during the period of the "Confederation." "Pomerania" was a German area (formerly populated by Slavic people, who later "mixed" with the incoming (ruling) Germans, with many thus losing their Slavic identity, although in the eastern part (near Poland), Slavic dialects and identity persisted. Pomerania is located along a stretch of coast of the Baltic Sea. During the period of Napoleon, the western part was under Swedish rule, with the larger part being part of Prussia. Today, most of what was considered to be Pomerania is now part of Poland.

WORD HISTORY:
Hind-I'm just dealing with the noun in this case, not the "hind" of "behind" or "hind leg." While this is no longer a common word (at least in American English), I always encourage people to use some of our more antiquated words, or to at least get to know something about them. Famous English seafarer Sir Francis Drake named his ship "the Golden Hind."^ This means "female deer," and it goes back to Indo European "kem/kemti," which meant hornless. This gave the Old Germanic offshoot of "khindo/khinda" (then "hindo?"), which then gave Old English "hind" (then "probably" with a short 'i' pronunciation).  Germanic relatives include German "Hinde," Low German doesn't seem to have a modern form, but it once had "hind(e);" likewise, I could not find a form in modern Frisian, but it too once had "hind," Dutch "hinde," Icelandic, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish all have "hind," the form passed onto them from their ancestor, Old Norse. All the Germanic forms mean "female deer."

^ When I decided to do the history of this word, I already knew of it, as back in the early 1960s, NBC ran a TV series for a short while (made in England) named "The Adventures of Sir Francis Drake," and his ship, the Golden Hind, was often shown in the series. 

Friday On Wednesday

Since I don't often do articles on Fridays, I decided to post "Friday" on Wednesday. This is the last of the "days of the week." You can find the other days, as well as the history for "day" itself, by clicking on "days of the week" in the labels at the bottom of this article.

This goes back to the Indo European root "pri," which had the notion/meaning "love." In Old Germanic, the "p" became "f," although no one really knows for certain how our Indo European ancestors pronounced each sound, since those dumbbells didn't even have recording devices of any kind. Anyway, this gave Old Germanic "frijaz," meaning "beloved, loving wife." In the realm of Germanic gods there was "Frigg" (also at times spelled "Frigga," especially in English, as in Anglo-Saxon it was spelled "Frige," and the "e" was pronounced like "eh" or a sort "a" back then). She was the wife of Wotan/Woden/Odin (spelling/pronunciation varied by Germanic dialect) and the goddess of "married love." Her name was used by the Germanic tribes for Friday, which back then in Anglo-Saxon (Old English) was "Frigedaeg." Our other Germanic relatives have: German "Freitag," Dutch "vrijdag," Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish "fredag," (West) Frisian "Freed." Icelandic is the exception, and does not use the same form ("föstudagur").