The German Question, Part One Hundred

"Germany's Weimar Republic" Part Three
"The Occupation Of The Ruhr"

(Just for some background, this paragraph and the note is from Part 99) "The Versailles Treaty made Germany responsible for reparations mainly to Belgium and France. When the Germans defaulted on some aspects (mainly timber and coal) of these payments, French and Belgian troops entered Germany in January of 1923 and occupied the Ruhr, the country's main industrial region.*"

Not only were the French concerned about losing the resources from the German reparations, but they feared that if Germany could not be made to comply with this aspect of the Versailles Treaty, the Germans would gradually get out from under other provisions of the treaty. They saw enforcement as imperative. The Germans called for strikes by workers in the Ruhr; thus beginning months of popular resistance to the occupation. Some German workers and organizers of the resistance were killed or arrested,** which only gained Germany sympathy from other parts of the world. The strikes had the further consequence of damaging the frail German economy, as production of many goods used for both domestic consumption and for foreign trade essentially came to a standstill. Escalating German inflation, already on the rise before the occupation, exploded, as the German government, in an effort to meet its obligations, printed money with little or no backing to give it value. While the German currency lost value, so did the value of French money, as without German reparations, other nations feared for the resilience of the French economy.

World War One and its aftermath really began American involvement in European affairs. Influential American leaders and businessmen wanted a stable Europe, including a stable Germany. This very much coincided with Britain's desires. With the tension of the Ruhr occupation escalating, a committee was set up consisting of two members each from France, Belgium, Italy, Britain and the United States. The committee, called the "Dawes Committee," after American Vice President Charles Dawes,*** devised a plan to restructure German reparations in an attempt to assure payment. America provided loans to Germany to help their economy recover and to help guarantee payment of reparations. Germany would collect various taxes to make the payments. The "Dawes Plan," as it was known, established a lowered payment plan for Germany, but with progressively higher payments over a five year period, with the maximum to be reached and continued in year five. In return, the French and Belgians would withdraw from the Ruhr industrial region of Germany (which took place in August of 1925). The Germans signed on the dotted line and Dawes received a shared "Nobel Peace Prize."****

Next: ""The Cost of a Loaf of Bread-Hyperinflation in Weimar Germany" (A "Word History" is below the notes)

* (From Part 99) "The German government claimed it could not meet all reparations. The Belgians and French argued that the Germans were simply playing games to see if the Allies would enforce the reparations' provisions of the treaty. The British and Americans wanted the amount of reparations to be lowered, which only irritated the French that much more."

** It certainly seems that more than a hundred Germans were killed during the occupation, but an exact number is difficult to determine.

*** Dawes, a Republican who was born in Ohio, came from a banking and financial background. He held financial positions in the former administrations of President McKinley and President Harding, both Republicans.

**** The other recipient, British Foreign Secretary, Austen Chamberlain, shared the award because of his work on a series of European treaties (collectively known as "Locarno Treaty" or "Pact"), but he had nothing to do with the Dawes Plan.

WORD HISTORY:
Republic/Public-The main part of this compound goes back to Latin "publicus/poplicus," meaning "about the people." Where Latin got the word is a matter of discussion, with some linguists believing it was a borrowing from Etruscan (see note). The first part goes back to Latin "res," which meant "matter, thing." Some linguists believe this traces back to an Indo European root "re" or "rei," others are not so certain. Regardless, Latin had "respublica," meaning "matter of the people." This gave French, a Latin-based language, "république." It seems to have been borrowed into English at some point during the 1600s. The word "public" was borrowed into English in the 1400s from French "public," which traces back to the Latin forms given above. Other Germanic languages also borrowed the word: German has "Republik" (capital "R," as all German nouns are capitalized), Dutch and Low German have "republiek," West Frisian has "republyk," Norwegian has "republikk," Swedish has "republik," and Danish has "Republik."

NOTE: Etruscan is something of a mystery language, but it was possibly related to some languages of the Aegean Sea area, including "Minoan." Etruscan was spoken in a fairly large part of what is now Italy, but it died out when Latin came to the area, although some of its words were borrowed into Latin.

The German Question, Part Ninety-Nine

"Germany's Weimar Republic"-Part Two
"Economic Mess"

The German post-war economy was a mess. The Allies continued the blockade of Germany, even after the armistice, severely restricting the type of goods that could be imported into Germany. The loss of Alsace-Lorraine to France and certain parts of the eastern territories to the reborn Poland removed large amounts of  industry, raw materials, and food products. The war's consequences continued economically, as trade relationships had been disrupted or destroyed by the war. The shift back to a peacetime economy was not easy for any country, but it was especially difficult in Germany, where economic conditions were even poor during the last couple years of the war. Factories that had produced war goods could not easily switch to non military goods and make a profit in an economy where many people by then were impoverished. With jobs scare, some demobilized soldiers joined the ranks of "political armies," like the "Freikorps," on the right, or the left wing groups more in concert with communism. Street fights between these various political "armies" were not uncommon, and periodic calls for strikes by both right wing and left wing groups only further disrupted the weakened German economy.

The unpopular Treaty of Versailles gave those on the far right a chance to blame the left of center government for signing the treaty, although these same extremists never made clear a viable alternative to signing the treaty. Would they have proposed restarting the war? That was really the only alternative and I think we all can make a very educated guess as to what the military outcome would have been. The question is, what would the political outcome have been? With economic conditions so poor during the last couple of years of the war, and with so many dispirited Germans, re-initiating hostilities may well have brought a communist government to power.

The Versailles Treaty made Germany responsible for reparations mainly to Belgium and France. When the Germans defaulted on some aspects (mainly timber and coal) of these payments, French and Belgian troops entered Germany in January of 1923 and occupied the Ruhr, the country's main industrial region.*

Coming up in the next couple of articles: "The Occupation of the Ruhr," "The Cost of a Loaf of Bread-Hyperinflation in Weimar Germany," and "The Right Wing Strikes Back-Blaming Socialists and Jews For Germany's Defeat"

*The German government claimed it could not meet all reparations. The Belgians and French argued that the Germans were simply playing games to see if the Allies would enforce the reparations' provisions of the treaty. The British and Americans wanted the amount of reparations to be lowered, which only irritated the French that much more.

WORD HISTORY:
Hem-The history of this word is a bit sketchy. It "likely" goes back to an Old Germanic form like hemjam/hemjan," which then traces back to Indo European "kem/khem," with the notion of "compress, enclose something, fit something inside an area." Old English (Anglo-Saxon) had "hem," with the basic notion of "border," and thus also "block;" as in "block in;" that is, "hem in," (a border "blocks" easy access to other areas, and "border" also ties in with the "enclose something" idea). Later English also spelled it "hemm." The variant forms "hamm" or "ham" (not the meat), often used in English place names, like "Nottingham,* meant "something enclosed, enclosed area;" even enclosed or "bordered" by water, forests, hills, etc, when used of towns or villages. It is closely related to "home;" that is, "an enclosed place to live." The verb form "hem" came from the noun during the 1300s. Of course in more modern times, "hem" is used more for the "stitched border of a garment." German has "hemmen" as a verb, meaning, among other things, "to stop, impede, obstruct," and "Hemmung," a noun meaning "a restraint," and "Hemmnis," another noun meaning "an obstruction, obstacle." From what I can tell, Dutch once also had "hemmen," as in German, but it is no longer used. Low German has "hemmen," meaning "to brake," and "Hamme," "a fenced in field," Swedish has "hämma," which means "impede, hinder." The English expression "hem and haw" shows the "hem in/block in" notion, for an action or idea that can't get moving due to being blocked by procrastination. 

* Obviously this form also came to some place names in the New World too, brought here by English colonists.

The German Question, Part Ninety-Eight

"Germany's Weimar Republic" Part One

With Germany defeated in World War One and the Kaiser gone, the new German republic tried to govern the country. Delegates met in the city of Weimar to forge a constitution;* thus the "unofficial" name of the new republic, "The Weimar Republic;" its proper designation simply being, "Deutsches Reich." The country was dispirited and many factions, both of the political left and right, seemed ready to pull the fragile new system apart. Communist elements actually claimed a Soviet republic in Bavaria, only to be defeated by former soldiers organized and led by right wing officers. These right wing units and militias were called the "Freikorps," or "Free Corps," and they provided the basis for many other right wing political organizations, including what was to become the Nazi Party.

* Weimar is located in east central Germany in the state of Thuringia (Thüringen in German).

WORD HISTORY:
Fret-This is the verb meaning "be anxious, worry;" often used in expressions like, "don't fret over" something. This word traces back to Indo European "ed/et," which meant "to bite," and it is closely related to "eat" (see the Word History at this link for "eat:" http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2011/05/german-question-part-ninety-seven.html ). "Fret" is actually a compound, with the "fr" tracing back to Old Germanic "fra," which was used as an intensifier; in this case, intensifying "eat," to mean "eat gluttonously, to gobble up." The Old Germanic compound was "fraetanan" (see further below) with that meaning. This gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "fretan," with the same meaning, including for animals. Later it was "freten," and the basic meaning of "gobble up" came to be used pretty much exclusively for animals or derogatorily for crude people. At that same time, around 1200, the more figurative sense of "to eat up with worry" developed. Gradually, the "gobble up" meaning died out, leaving English with the "worry" sense into the modern era. Common in the other Germanic languages, German has "fressen" which still retains the primary meaning "to eat, but only for animals," unless when used as an insult to someone (it also has the secondary meanings "corrode" [see Swedish below] and "worry excessively," as in English). "Fressen" was once spelled various ways in older forms of German, including "veretzen" and "vretzen." Low German has both "fräte" and "freten," both meaning "eat up, for animals," Dutch has "vreten," also with the meaning "take in food," often used of animals, West Frisian has "frette" (to eat, to feed, for animals), Swedish has "fräta," which means "corrode;" that is, "eat away." Danish has "fråse," meaning "to eat up greedily." I did not find examples in Icelandic or Norwegian. I'm not sure, but the old compound form of "fraetanan" may have been a West Germanic formation, rather than Old Germanic, as it appears that both Swedish and Danish borrowed forms of the word, likely from Low German and German, respectively, as I could not find a form in Old Norse, the forerunner of the modern North Germanic languages (Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Swedish are most prominent), and that would explain the absence of forms in Norwegian and Icelandic. Old Germanic was the parent language of North, West and East Germanic. Forms of East Germanic have all died out and English, Frisian, German, Low German and Dutch are West Germanic.

The German Question, Part Ninety-Seven

"A Divisive Treaty" Part Six/C-2

"Territorial Changes/Eastern Boundaries"

The most contentious provisions of the Versailles Treaty were not really about the establishment of a Polish state, but rather what borders that new state would have. The Allies, much supported by American President Woodrow Wilson, wanted the new Polish nation to have an outlet to the Baltic Sea, mainly for the purpose of trade. The problem was, German East Prussia was directly to the north of most of the core of the new Polish nation, to the northeast lay Lithuania, and to the northwest lay much of German West Prussia. Lithuania was also just being established from the former Russian Empire, and was overwhelmingly Lithuanian.* East Prussia was overwhelmingly German, with some pro-Polish elements, mainly along its border areas with Poland.** This left West Prussia. The population of the region was somewhere between about 550,000 and 600,000 Poles and about 375,000 to 425,000 Germans. The area was given to Poland, providing a "corridor" to the Baltic Sea between German East Prussia to the east and the rest of Germany to the west. In the midst of the area lay the city of Danzig (Gdańsk in Polish) with a population of about 360,000, very heavily German. The combined Polish and Kashubian percentage of the population is tough to pin down, but "about" 10-12%. Kashubians were a Slavic people and thus related to the Poles. Danzig was made a "free city" under the administration of the newly established "League of Nations," but it was to serve Poland as a port.

No question about it, the "Polish Corridor," as it came to be called, and the detachment of Danzig from Germany, was a VERY sore spot for many Germans, and undoubtedly not just with right wing elements. This became a very significant territorial dispute with Poland a few years after Hitler took power and I will cover it later.

* The city of Memel (called "Klaipeda" by Lithuanians) and the area around it became part of Lithuania, after initial control by the League of Nations. The area had a population of about 140,000, about 27% of whom were Lithuanians, with the rest German and "Germanized" Lithuanians. The idea was to eventually hold a referendum to determine if the area should return to Germany, but it never happened. The loss of this territory remained something of a grievance for some Germans.

** East Prussia was a mixture of Germans and people of Slavic background who, over time, had been "Germanized," and thus many (probably most) saw themselves as "Germans." There were also some elements of Lithuanian background along its eastern border, many of them "Germanized." A referendum (plebiscite) was held in the border areas in accordance with the Versailles Treaty. The results were overwhelming for most areas remaining in Germany, and only a couple of small areas in the western part (bordering West Prussia) were made part of Poland.

WORD HISTORY:
Eat-This word goes back to the Indo European root "ed/et" (see note) which meant "to bite." This then gave Old Germanic "etanan," meaning "to eat," which then gave Old English "etan," with the same meaning. It later was spelled "eten," before acquiring the modern spelling "eat." Frisian has "ite," Dutch and Low German Saxon have "eten," standard German has "essen," Luxembourish has "iessen," Swedish has "äta," Icelandic has "eta." Both modern Danish and modern Norwegian use a different word for "eat," but Danish had "aede," and Norwegian had "ete" (might still be used in dialect?). The modern German and Luxembourgish "s" sound compared to the "t" in the other Germanic languages traces back centuries ago and is not uncommon in other words, like English "kettle," but German "Kessel." It was part of the sound shift that took place in the Germanic dialects generally stretching from central Germany southwards dating back about 1200 to 1400 years ago.

Note: In reference to "et," many, many years ago I heard this little joke: A boy in school told his teacher, "Teacher, I et six eggs for breakfast." The teacher said, "You mean ate, don't you?" The boy said, "Hm, maybe it was eight that I et." (Hey, no falling on the floor in laughter.)

The German Question, Part Ninety-Six

"A Divisive Treaty" Part Six/C-1"

Territorial Changes/Eastern Boundaries"

The territorial changes to Germany's eastern boundaries were significant, and some of the changes were highly controversial. Most of the province around the city of Posen ("Poznan" in Polish) was returned to the "new" Poland, although by that time the Poles had already captured much of the area from German control.* It contained a population of more than four million, overwhelmingly Polish, but with a German minority. There was no referendum, but the area would have undoubtedly voted in substantial numbers to be a part of Poland.

A small portion of Upper Silesia also became part of Poland, with some 25,000 citizens, most of them Polish. Again, no referendum, but similar to the above. Another portion of Upper Silesia went to the new state of Czechoslovakia, with nearly 50,000 residents, many of them of Czech ancestry. There was no referendum, but as the area had been under German rule and influence for so long, these "Germanized Czechs" may have opted for Germany, but the call to nationalism can be very powerful, and they likely would have chosen Czechoslovakia, but we will never know. In a larger part of Upper Silesia, a referendum had been held in accordance with the Versailles Treaty, with 60% voting to remain with Germany,** but a large portion of the area, with more than 900,000 people, was given to Poland after Poles took military control of that part of the region, after some serious fighting with nationalist German units. This territorial loss remained something of a German grievance. For Germans who had lived under authoritarian rule for centuries, this was not a good example of "democracy in action." In fact, for a people more accustomed to "might makes right," this whole episode only reinforced that notion, as the Poles seized much of the territory they were then awarded by the Allies, which went against the whole principle of the referendum established by the Treaty of Versailles. This is not a matter of being for Germany and against Poland. The problem was the provision of the Treaty of Versailles. Personally, I favor the idea of the heavily Polish districts joining Poland, rather than observing the overall regional vote, which would have given all to Germany. The more evenly divided districts would have been a problem, as no matter how the vote tilted, the other side would have been less than happy. Then there may also well have been pockets of either Germans or Poles within larger areas where one or the other group was a majority. Moving over the border into one country or the other is about the only solution, but not without great pain, as many of these folks may have lived in these areas for generations.

Next, "The Polish Corridor and Danzig"....

* For more information on Poland and the Polish uprising against German rule, see:

http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2011/03/german-question-part-eighty-eight.html

** The overall region had more than 2 million people, and about 1.2 million participated in the referendum. About 717,000 votes were cast for Germany and 483,000 for Poland. Generally speaking, the eastern areas, adjacent to Poland, voted more heavily for Poland and the western areas, adjacent to, and with strong historical ties to, Germany (Prussia), voted heavily for Germany. The areas more around the middle tended to vote for Germany, but by less than overwhelming majorities, and there were definite pockets of pro-Poland votes. It seems that "some" people of Polish background supported Germany, perhaps because of German domination of the area for so long. Just a guess, but I would think many of these people spoke both German and Polish. Silesia was important economically, because part of the area was a major industrial sector, so not only was ethnic identity an issue, but substantial economic impact was a concern for both Poland and Germany.

WORD HISTORY:
Speak-Forms of this word are common in the West Germanic languages (English is West Germanic), but beyond that fact, its ancestry is uncertain. It traces back to Old Germanic "sprekanan," which had the notion of "make sounds." This gave Old English "sprecan," but gradually the "r" sound died out (by 1100s?), which also happened in certain forms in other Germanic dialects back then, but these forms did not overtake the original pronunciation as in English. This left English with "specan," which then became "speken," before acquiring the modern spelling. Standard German has "sprechen," Low German and Dutch have "spreken," West Frisian has "sprekke."

The German Question, Part Ninety-Five

"A Divisive Treaty" Part Six/B
"Territorial Changes/Austria"

It is very important to note, the Versailles Treaty provided that Germany and Austria could not unite; thus throwing out the results of the early referendums in Austria, which had overwhelming support for Austrian unification with Germany. Understand, this was not the Austria of the just ended war, but rather the German part left over after the Austro-Hungarian Empire came apart. The population was approximately six and one half million, with a Hungarian minority of about 25,000 in the eastern part of the country, a Croatian minority of about 44,000 in the southeastern area, and a Slovenian minority in the south.* There were other very small minorities, including Gypsies, but Jews of various nationality backgrounds numbered at least 175,000, with most in Vienna. The German percentage of the population was likely around 95-96%; that is, those who considered themselves to be German.

Next in Part 6/C, the eastern boundaries.....

* Determining the Slovene population of those times is not easy. There was a referendum in some parts of the mixed German and Slovene areas to determine what sections would remain a part of Austria or to join what was to become Yugoslavia. The vote in this disputed area produced a vote of about 60% to 40% to remain part of Austria, with the 40% constituting some 14,000 votes, presumably all Slovenian. If I add in a thousand or so children and some non-voters (turnout was high), I'll call it 15,000 or so. The problem is, this was only in one area, and more Slovenes lived in a neighboring district, although much of the southern part of that district did join Slovenia, which became part of Yugoslavia.

WORD HISTORY:
Meat-This word traces back to Indo European "met/med/mat," which signified "measure." This gave Old Germanic "matiz," which had the notion of "portion of food" (Get it? Portion=measurement). This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "mete," still with the general meaning of "food, portion of food." By the 1300s, the word came to be used more and more to mean "flesh prepared as food." Close English relatives standard German, Low German, and Dutch all also have a form of the word with the "meat" meaning: German has "Mettwurst," a type of sausage, but this was borrowed from Low German "Met(t)," which meant "finely chopped or ground meat." Dutch too has "Metworst." Old High German had "maz," with the general "food" meaning, but the word has since died out, as did forms in West Frisian. So, did English perhaps influence its kindred languages in northwestern Europe, or did they influence the English meaning? Or was this "meat" meaning a secondary meaning anyway among the West Germanic languages (see note) when the Anglo-Saxons left the continent; remaining unrecorded amongst the common folk until gaining traction at a later time? Whatever the case, during the 1300s, the word began to overtake "flesh," which had been the general English word for "meat."

NOTE: The North Germanic languages retained the "food" meaning, as Danish has "mad," Swedish and Norwegian have "mat," and Icelandic has "matur," all meaning "food."