Allied Commanders of World War Two/MacArthur, Part Three

"Douglas MacArthur" Part 3

Japanese air attacks on the Philippines were followed by troop landings and the American-Filipino forces retreated to Bataan,* where stubborn resistance to the Japanese invasion continued. The situation had become hopeless, as no relief of the besieged forces was possible at that time. MacArthur was ordered by President Roosevelt to leave the Philippines for Australia to develop a strategy to combat the Japanese Pacific assault. In March 1942, MacArthur, his wife and young son, and a number of aides and staff personnel escaped by PT boats to an airbase in the southern Philippines. From there they were flown to Australia. Upon arrival in Australia MacArthur told an audience, "I came out of Bataan, and I shall return." The "I shall return" part became an American slogan used throughout the war. The American and Filipino forces surrendered by May 1942, but MacArthur was awarded the Medal of Honor for the stubborn defense against the Japanese army.**

In Australia MacArthur was named Supreme Allied Commander for the Southwest Pacific. His command consisted mainly of American and Australian troops, with increasingly powerful American air and naval units. A little over a month after the final surrender of the Philippines, American naval forces inflicted a devastating defeat on the Japanese navy at the "Battle of Midway." An American landing on the island of Guadalcanal in August 1942 eventually brought a victory there by early 1943. The war was turning in favor of the Allies. Other victories followed, and sights were set on fulfillment of the "I shall return" pledge.

* Bataan is a peninsula on the western side of Luzon, the largest island in the Philippines. A quantity of supplies had been stored on Bataan. Manila, the capitol of the Philippines, is located on the island of Luzon.

** Just a little note here: when I was younger, World War Two was a very popular subject, as the war hadn't been over all that long, and many veterans were still alive. MacArthur remained highly controversial among some of those veterans, with some feeling he "ran away" from the Philippines to save himself, leaving his men to their fate. My father had served in the Pacific during the war and he liked MacArthur, so I grew up with a healthy respect for the general. I was stunned to hear some of the charges leveled at MacArthur. As more and more information was released on World War Two, I felt satisfied that the charge of MacArthur running away was unjustified. He had been ordered by the President to leave the Philippines.

WORD HISTORY:
Spruce-The noun form is a shortening of "Spruce fir tree." This seems to have come into English in the 1300s from French "Pruce," which meant "Prussia." No one has been able to put forth a credible reason why the "s" was added to the beginning in English. The French term went back to Latin "Prussia." (See note below) It seems trade goods from the German Hanseatic League were often referred to as being from "Prussia," and the particular fir tree was thought to be Prussian; thus the term was applied to the tree, with some even calling it "Prussian fir." The verb form came about in the 1500s and it has the same origin, although it seems to have come from Prussian leather, a common trade item centuries ago, and then dubbed "Spruce leather." The leather was then often used to make a fine, trim looking jacket-like garment. The notion of "fine, trim garment" came to be applied to other items that were perfected, or "spruced up." NOTE: Prussia was named after a particular tribe, the Prussians, who were closely related to the Lithuanians and the Latvians. As Germans spread eastward, they conquered the area and then settled there, with the Prussians mixing in with the new German settlers. The region continued to be called "Prussia," and the inhabitants "Prussians," even though the area became "Germanized," and the Prussian language died out. The terms "Prussia" and "Prussians" came to be associated with the German settlements there. Since the end of World War Two, the German region of Prussia has ceased to exist, with much of the former province becoming a part of Poland, and a smaller section a part of the Soviet Union (now Russia).

The German Question, Part Eighty-Eight

 "The Aftermath of the Great War & The Weimar Republic"/Part Three/C

"Poland Anew"

During the war, the Allies, and most certainly American President Woodrow Wilson, agreed that an independent Polish nation should be re-established when the Great War ended. The problem was, no one knew exactly how the borders of the new nation should be drawn.* Poland had been dismembered by three European powers in the second half of the 1700s, although it temporarily appeared for a few years during Napoleon's time, only to go out of existence again upon Napoleon's defeat. Russia controlled the largest part of Poland, including Warsaw and eastern Poland; Austria (still the leading German state at that time) controlled a portion of southern Poland, and Prussia (the other dominant German state) controlled western Poland, including Poznan (Posen, in German),** which was a majority Polish city, but with a substantial German minority, which included the local government officials. Germany controlled the Russian portion for much of World War One, as the Russian armies retreated from most of the area.

When the armistice went into effect on November 11, 1918, Poles rose up in rebellion to German rule shortly thereafter in late December. Much of the Polish territory taken more than a hundred years before was again put under Polish control. Germany, in the midst of revolution and dispirited by defeat, was limited in its ability to launch a major effort to regain the lost territory, but some of the fighting was very intense, and the Germans did periodically succeed in recapturing, at least temporarily, some lost towns and villages.

This rebellion is important, because during that time, a new Polish government (pretty much separate from this rebellion) was taking shape in Warsaw to administer a reborn Poland. Further, negotiations were also simultaneously underway in Paris to put together a treaty to formally end the war (remember, technically there was only an armistice in place at that time) and make boundary adjustments. By taking so much territory, the brave Polish insurgents laid claim to a substantial parcel of land and gained the attention of the Paris negotiators, who decided to include them in the listing of "Allied" forces. It was not long before the "Warsaw" Poles and the Polish forces engaged against the Germans essentially joined together. The details of the eventual treaty would inflame many Germans, and I will deal with the treaty and I will return to the situation between Germany and Poland in the near future. The main thing to remember is, an independent Poland was a fact and again a neighbor on Germany's eastern frontier.

*While most Americans trace their ancestry to Europe, far fewer Americans, in my opinion, understood (or today, understand) the potential consequences of border adjustments between countries in Europe. Americans have to look at things in the context that many European countries are no more the size (in area) of some American states. Americans might drive a few hundred miles and cross into two, three, or even more states and never think anything about it. Doing the same thing in Europe could put you into a different country or two, complete with a different language or languages, ethnic background, religion and type of government. As nationalism grew among the various peoples of Europe, particularly in the 1800s and 1900s, some "ethnic populations" included in countries not ruled by people of their own background grew restless in the desire to be included in nations controlled by their own ethnic group. The extent of this nationalism varied from group to group, but like it or not like it, it was a fact. Just as an example, for those following this series, you have seen how the various ethnic groups of Austria-Hungary put strains on holding the multi-ethnic empire together for quite some time; a force which finally pulled Austria-Hungary apart.

** The Prussian controlled territories later became part of Germany upon unification in 1871.

WORD HISTORY: 
Deck-Since I did "thatch" in the last installment, I decided to follow with "deck," which is really the same word as "thatch." "Deck" is interesting, because it replaced an already existing English word to which it is closely related (as I noted above, actually the same word, but in altered form). It goes back to Indo European "(s)teg," which meant "cover." The "s" is in parentheses because some Indo European dialects emphasized its sound (modern Lithuanian, for instance, has "stogas" for "roof"), while Old Germanic emphasized the "t" sound (or "d" in some dialects). This gave Old Germanic "thakan," which also meant "cover, covering," which then gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) the verb "theccan," "to cover," and the noun "thaec," "roof" (see "thatch" in previous article for the further history of this word in English). Meanwhile, in Low German and Dutch, close relatives of English, their forms of the same word developed, it seems as "deck" and "dek" (meaning "roof" or "covering") in the noun forms and "decken" and "dekken" in verb forms, and both meaning "to cover." There was heavy trade between England and northwestern Europe, the land of Dutch and Low German. With the related English word, "thaec," that became modern "thatch," already taken, so to speak (and by then having the tie to "straw" for roofing), English borrowed "dekke" from Dutch "dec" in the early to mid 1400s. It COULD be that English developed the sense of "covering for a ship," as early usage of this borrowing related to "canvas material to cover a boat." That meaning progressed to "covering for a ship," and then to "covering/roof of one area that served as a walking surface above." Modern German has "Deck" with the same meaning, but German could have taken that meaning from English, or did it just take the same sense development? I don't know. Dutch didn't develop the same nautical meaning until well after English used it in that manner; however, at about the time of the English borrowing, Low German had "(ver)deck," with a possible tie to "ship's covering." All sources noted that use for "a pack of cards," dating to the late 1500s, undoubtedly came from the notion of the "cards being stacked like the decks of a ship." "Deck the halls," as in the Christmas song, simply means "cover the halls," which was use of the verb form, also a borrowing from Dutch "dekken." This borrowed verb form replaced the closely related English form, "theccan," of the same meaning. German has "Decke"=cover; "Deckel"=lid; "Deck"=ship's deck; (verb) "decken"= to cover. Besides the German and Dutch forms, other Germanic languages have similar words, all tracing back to the same sources as the original Old English words, and having to do with "cover": West Frisian has "dekke" (to cover, wrap up), Swedish has "däck," Norwegian has "dekk," Danish has "daek." (NOTE: The verb "deck" meaning "to hit someone hard enough to knock them down," as in, "If that guy makes another remark to my wife, I'll deck him," can be seen as a separate verb or simply as another meaning of the original verb borrowed from Dutch, as it came from the notion of knocking someone to the deck of a ship in the 20th Century, perhaps patterned after the verb use of "floor" in the similar sense, which developed in the mid 1600s: "If that guy messes with me, I'll floor him.")

The German Question, Part Sixty-Two

"Bismarck" Part Five/G "Bismarck as Chancellor & A Treaty With 'Contentious Relatives' ""Ethnic Minorities in Bismarckian Germany/German Jews"

For those who have been following this series, remember, until the founding of the actual (Second) German Empire in 1871, the individual German states each had their own laws governing such things as "citizenship." In the German state of Prussia, religious tolerance became something of a tradition going back to Friedrich Wilhelm, the great grandfather of  Frederick the Great, in the 1600s. On the other hand, certain German states, like Austria, were not as tolerant, even though the German emperor was almost always from Austria, and those emperors were at times, but certainly not always, inclined to religious tolerance. The emperors could not force other German leaders to grant religious tolerance, and even in their own Habsburg lands the local leaders, steeped in staunch Catholicism, were not always prone to follow the emperor's lead, although he was also the head of the Habsburg family. Laws and tolerance varied in the many German states over the centuries, but by the mid 1800s, more and more of the states made attempts to grant equality to all of their citizens, regardless of religious belief. Of course, "granting equality" is different from having everyone in the general population "accept" people of differing religions, but ever so gradually, German Jews became much more integrated into German society, with most eventually seeing themselves as "German," and indeed, they were German citizens. One must also consider that, just as in other religious groups, German Jews practiced their faith to varying degrees, with some not adhering to any particular religious beliefs. Then too, Jews and Germans "intermingled," just as "Germans" had intermingled with other "groups" of people, as I have shown in this series of articles, throughout their history. The later Nazi nonsense about "purity," was just that, NONSENSE, period (make that "exclamation point")!*

Over the centuries Jews came to Germany for many reasons, including wars, persecution or out-and-out terror in other lands, often coming from Poland or Russia. Orthodox Jews, by their very beliefs, did not integrate into German society as well, even with the existing German Jews who were often far more secular. These Orthodox Jews experienced far more persecution in every day life, but this was certainly not exclusive to Germany, but elsewhere, too, not that this makes it better. When the North German Confederation was established by Bismarck, religious tolerance and equality (in theory) became law.** When the Confederation became the German Empire in 1871, the same law remained in effect.*** During Bismarck's time, the Jewish population was somewhere between 500,000 and about 575,000, depending upon the year.

This doesn't mean that all Germans took tolerant positions toward Jews during Bismarck's time, as there were extremist nationalist groups that viewed Jews as "foreign." These groups eventually tried to make major inroads into the political system and establish a presence in the Reichstag (the German Parliament). They desired to enact laws repealing equality and religious tolerance. In that general era, these groups ebbed and flowed, but they never made major gains in those times. They certainly were forerunners of what was to come later. (A Word History is below the notes)

* For an interesting take on "intermingling," see my article "Hitler The Jew?": http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2010/10/hitler-jew.html

** Official government positions remained difficult for Jews to attain, and some "converted" to Christianity in order to advance (or at least that was the "take" on such conversions). Remember, Catholics had similar difficulties, and they were Christians! (Prussia, the dominant German state after 1866, was heavily Protestant.)

*** Bismarck and many Prussian officials were not as tolerant of German Catholics.

WORD HISTORY:
Tannen(baum)/Tan-This word, probably known to most of you from the Christmas song, "O Tannenbaum," technically does not mean "Christmas tree," although through repeated usage in that context, it certainly has taken on that meaning. It means "fir tree," in German, and the first part of the word is closely related to English "tan," which is what I will cover here in this Word History. I will cover "Baum," in the next part of this series on the Germans. So again you get two words "Tanne(n)" and "tan." After lots of searching around, I came up with an Indo European root for this word, "dhonu/dhanu," which certainly had to do with "trees," and "perhaps" specifically "oak trees." Several sources expressed the belief that some Germanic dialects (and perhaps Latin, too) acquired the word from Celtic,^ but that is not certain, although some old Celtic dialects had similar words with a connection to "oak" trees. Whatever the case, Old High German had "tanna," which meant "fir" (tree), and seemingly also possibly "oak" (tree) in some old dialects. Perhaps the acorns and pine cones made people use the same word, at least at times, but both German and English also have related specific words for "oak" (in German it is "Eiche," pronounced similarly to "Ike-eh"). The Old High German word then produced modern German "Tann," meaning "pine forest," and it is "der Tann," indicating that grammatically the noun is masculine, and the term is often more poetic in usage rather than as an everyday word. The same Old High German "tanna," also gave modern German "Tanne," which means "fir tree," and it is "die (pronounced like "dee") Tanne," indicating that it is grammatically feminine. Exactly when the word came into English is difficult to say, but the popular song was written in the 1820s in Leipzig, Germany, and while the word "may" have been present prior to that time with some American English speakers because of German immigrants, the song undoubtedly popularized the word, especially around Christmas. When I was a kid, the song was even taught in both English and German in my elementary and junior high school.

Latin had "tannum" (which meant "oak bark," from the same Indo European source above) and the later derived verb form "tannare," which meant "to use tree bark to dye animal skins;" thus, "tan hides." This then gave Old English "tannian" (perhaps between 900 and 1000 A.D.), meaning "to tan hides," which later became "tannen" in the Middle English period, before the modern shortened version "tan," used as both a verb and a noun. The the first quarter of the 1500s brought the usage "to get browned by the sun" (the noun "tan" for the result of being browned by the sun seems to have developed from the verb in the 1700s ... mid?), and the mid 1600s brought the English expression "tan someone's hide" (that is, "beat or spank someone's backside").

^ Celtic is a branch of the Indo European family of languages, and as such, it is related to English, but further down the family tree. Celtic dialects once blanketed large parts of Europe, but in more modern times, its limited number of representatives still in existence, which include Welsh, Irish Gaelic, Scots (Scottish) Gaelic and Breton (spoken in the Brittany region of France), are fighting for survival. 

The German Question, Part Fifty-Six

"Bismarck" Part Five/A "Bismarck as Chancellor & A Treaty With 'Contentious Relatives' "

Just a note about Luxemburg/Luxembourg to start: Luxembourg remained an independent country and a possession of the Dutch throne, but it also remained a member of the German Customs Union ("Zollverein"), thus, giving it continued strong ties to Germany without being a member state.

So with a newly united nation, Bismarck set out in his mind to strengthen that unity. Germany was a nation with a predominately Protestant north, and with a predominately Catholic south.* Now that staunchly Catholic Austria was excluded from the new nation, and with Protestant Prussia having led the unification efforts, Protestantism was the favored religion, and most positions in the national government were occupied by Protestants. The Papacy had been controversial for centuries, and not only in the German territories, but within Christianity as a whole. The Catholic Church was organized to control matters and adherents of the Church, with a central authority in Rome. With such a governing system, non Catholics always feared that adherents to Catholicism would have divided loyalties between Church and state.**

Bismarck was the "Reichskanzler" of Germany ("Imperial Chancellor," or "prime minister," for a term better known to many English speaking people), but he also was still the head of the government of Prussia. In his first few years as head of the new government, Bismarck implemented policies to try to lessen the influence of the Catholic Church in Germany, and sometimes just in Prussia. Further, there were efforts to "Germanize" Jews, Poles, and Wends (Sorbians). This overall approach to lessen various influences in Germany came to be known as the "Kulturkampf," or "Culture War;" although, some historians limit the term to the attempt to lessen Catholic influence. To be brief here, over time, the laws to lessen Catholic influence: forbade clergy from discussing or preaching about political matters to congregants, under threat of imprisonment; banished the Jesuits from Germany; gave the government the right to inspect religious schools; gave the government the right to train, appoint, and discipline members of the clergy; removed marriage from religious control to that of the "civil authorities." Clergy who protested the laws were arrested. The measures and their enforcement inflamed relations between the German government and the Papacy, with Bismarck literally breaking off diplomatic contacts with the Pope. This war against the Catholic Church, instigated by German nationalists and by the German government, enforced by German police and civil authorities, was an ominous precursor to what would come a little more than six decades later.

The overall measures against Catholic influence had some success, but it also had many negatives, including the negative view of such among some foreign nations, especially those with strong Catholic traditions. Political parties were growing in Germany, and Catholics rallied to the "Catholic Center Party," which gained in popularity, and which also contained traditional conservative Catholics, something Bismarck eventually needed politically. The whole matter tarnished Bismarck's reputation to some extent, and he reconciled with the Papacy to some degree when a new Pope took over the Catholic Church in 1878.

To be continued with Bismarck's attempts to "Germanize" the non-German population..... (A Word History is below the notes)

* Notice in both cases I used the word "predominantly." Especially in the north, there were some especially strong Catholic areas, including parts of the Rhineland, part of Alsace and part of Lorraine in the west. Then there were the staunchly Catholic Poles, and some German Catholics in the eastern part of the country. The southern areas were more uniformly Catholic, but there were some Protestants there.

** This was also the case in America. Catholic candidates, especially for high office, were often overtly and covertly thought to be puppets for the Papacy, which was trying to take control of the country. For those old enough to remember, when John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, ran for President, many Protestants openly said how the Pope would give Kennedy his orders, if Kennedy won the election. I can distinctly remember some people saying, "We're going to be controlled from 'across the pond.' " Kennedy won, and all Americans did not suddenly become members of the Knights of Columbus, don Rosary Beads, attend six o'clock Mass, or say "Hail Marys," except in reference to long, desperate passes by quarterbacks on the football field. To be honest, however, in Bismarck's time, the Church had much more direct influence on many of its members than it seemingly has in more modern times, although the Papacy had been dealt a serious blow as a result of the "Franco-Prussian War," which was just covered in the previous installments here. Because of the war, Napoleon III withdrew his troops from their protection of the Papacy role in Rome. This permitted Italian troops to enter Papal territory and for Italy to annex the territory to the still relatively new Italian nation. Rome, which had been named the capital of the new nation nearly a decade before, then truly became the seat of the Italian government.

WORD HISTORY:
Krieg-Since I did "Blitz" earlier, here is the "krieg" part of the compound. First, interestingly the Germanic languages did not seem to have a common word for "war." I could not find a lot of information on this word; thus its origin is unknown to me. It goes back to Old High German "krig," which supposedly meant "stubbornness." Old High German is a term linguists use to denote the Germanic dialect that developed not long after the Germanic elements that went to Britain left the Continent, and it is the direct ancestor of modern German. Later the form "kriec" developed, with the meaning "strain, endeavor," and this then developed into the meaning "war."

For an updated version, see:
http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2010/11/revised-word-history.html

For "Blitz," see: http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2010/11/german-question-part-fifty-two.html

The German Question, Part Fifty-Four

"Bismarck" Part 4/C "The Defeat Of France"

There are numerous sources for those interested in the actual battles during the Franco-Prussian War, but my dealings with such will be very limited.

In the war between France and the Germans, the French had a slight advantage in rifles, as their guns were of more modern design than the German guns. The Germans certainly had a big advantage in artillery, as the French artillery pieces were still muzzle-loaded, which took time, and the German guns were the new and much more rapid fire breech-loading guns. The Germans eventually also had a numerical advantage in manpower, as they were able to mobilize more than a million men (about one and a quarter million, by most sources), while the French eventually had slightly less than a million men, although their initial forces seemingly were a bit larger than what was available to the Germans. The Germans mobilized their forces far faster than thought possible by the French commanders. Further, the French thought the south German states would join the war AGAINST Prussia, as the secret alliances between Prussia and these states had indeed remained beyond French knowledge.

By early August, the French had taken the German city of Saarbrücken,* which lay just over the border. The French thought they were on their way to a march into the heart of Prussia and a quick victory, but the Prussians and the other Germans, especially Bavarians, were already converging on the area with substantial forces. The French withdrew back across the border, but German forces ended up surrounding them. Some French troops were able to flee toward the main body of the French army in the region, but the others were either killed or captured. Things would only get worse for the French. Two more German victories in the area within just days forced the French forces back, with high causalities; about 24,000 killed, wounded, and captured/missing (total for both battles), with the German forces, which were not only Prussian and Bavarian, but also from other German states, suffering more than 13,000 killed, wounded, missing/captured.

Large forces of the French army retreated to the city of Metz, which was a fortress. The Germans besieged the fortress on August 19, turning back all attempts by the French to break out. By October 27, the French forces surrendered the city, along with at least 180,000 men! It was a decisive German victory. In the meantime, French forces, with Emperor Napoleon III also present, tried to break the siege of Metz from the outside on September 1. They were trapped by German forces near the city of Sedan and defeated, with Napoleon III and his primary commander both being captured. The French suffered the loss of more than 120,000 men (most surrendered) and the Germans lost something over 9000. With Napoleon III's capture,** France again declared itself a republic, and the French leaders, after brief peace negotiations with Prussia, decided to continue the war. This brought the German armies right to Paris, where they initiated a siege.

The new government of France mobilized new armies in other parts of France. The intention was to relieve Paris with simultaneous attacks from various directions. The Germans sent relatively small forces (don't forget, they were besieging both Metz and Paris at that time) to try to disperse these new French troops before they could actually concentrate for an attack. Initially the French were successful against these German forces, but once the original French forces surrounded in Metz surrendered on October 27, the German forces that had been besieging the fortress came to the rescue. Eventually the Germans were victorious. Each German victory released those German troops to support military operations elsewhere. With food supplies low in Paris, and with little hope of any remaining French armies being able to successfully advance on the capital, the French surrendered. During surrender negotiations, Bismarck promised food would be supplied to Paris.

Next, "The Germans Unite....Sort Of-The Founding Of Modern Germany" (A Word History is below the notes)

* While Saarbrücken literally means "Saar Bridges" in modern German; the city being located on the Saar River, "supposedly" this simply evolved into that meaning, as the inhabitants prior to Germanic people were Celts, who called the area "Sarabriga," which meant something like, "large rock/boulder above flowing water," again supposedly from the cliffs above the river and wetlands below. "Some" say the second part, "briga," then was translated into Germanic as a form that is related to modern English "brook" and modern German "Bruch" (meaning "wetland, bog, swampy area"). When bridges were finally built, the pronunciation then followed suit, eventually becoming the modern form. By the way, if you didn't already notice, English "bridge" and German "Brücke" are related. The "n" at the end of the German form makes it plural, "bridges."

** Napoleon III was later released by the Germans and he, his wife and son went to England, where he died a couple of years later.

WORD HISTORY:
Folk-This goes back to Indo European "pel," one of the meanings of which was "multitude, abundance." This gave Old Germanic the offshoot "folkam," which meant both "people" and "group of warriors." This gave Old English "folc," with the more extended meaning "nation, tribe, people, military personnel." Later English adopted the "folk" spelling which has endured into modern times. English borrowed the Latin derived word "people," which then took over as the primary word, but "folk" has lasted, usually with the connotation "common people," evident in the derived adjective, "folksy." Its various forms are used throughout the Germanic languages: German, Low German and Dutch have "volk" (German spells it with a capital "V," but it is pronounced "f"), West Frisian, Swedish, Danish and Norwegian have "folk," Icelandic has "fólk." Besides meaning "people," the more extensive meaning "people of a nation" is also a part of many of the Germanic languages. Americans likely best know the German form from "Volkswagen."

NOTE: The Indo European form "pel" (variant form "ple") gave Greek "plethos," meaning "multitude," and Latin "plebs" meaning "people," so you can see the relationship to the Germanic form. Both Greek and Latin are Indo European languages related to English further down the family tree.

The German Question, Part Fifty-Three

"Bismarck" Part 4/B   "Crisis Over Spain"

Now, you may wonder what Spain has to do with Germans, Frenchmen, and German unification. Myself, when I first studied German history a few decades ago (you didn't think I was going to say "many decades ago," did you?), I wondered, "What does Spain have to do with Germans, Frenchmen, and German unification?" (Hm, that line sounds familiar.) First, you have to realize that, over the centuries, the various noble families of Europe had gradually become entwined through marriages, often, but not always, done for the purpose of gaining territory, or gaining potential military alliances. As people became more and more aware of genetics, and the potential hazards of close relatives marrying one another, these noble families often sought mates in other regions or other countries.* If you have been following this series, you may recall how the Habsburgs gained all sorts of lands due to marriages to foreign mates (see earlier articles on this subject). While this is a bit ahead of our story here, it shows how some of the families were connected at high levels: Queen Victoria of England was the grandmother of Kaiser Wilhelm II, who ruled Germany during the First World War period (we will be coming to this in the not too distant future). Not only that, she was the grandmother of the Empress Alexandra of Russia (of "Nicholas & Alexandra" fame), and the grandmother of King George V of England. These grandchildren all played prominent roles in the World War One period, 1914-1918 (Queen Victoria died in 1901).

So, the throne of Spain was vacant and it was offered, in 1870, to one of the Hohenzollerns, Leopold, who was Catholic (Spain was an overwhelmingly Catholic country) and who had Spanish family connections. His cousin was King Wilhelm I of Prussia.** Now, geography is important. Prussia and the other German states essentially border France to the east; Spain borders France to the south. France's Napoleon III*** may have made some foreign policy blunders, as I've noted here earlier, but he could read a map. Two Hohenzollern rulers on France's borders was not acceptable. Bismarck encouraged Leopold to accept the Spanish throne, knowing full well that it could provoke a war with France. The French made it clear that they were willing to fight Prussia to stop a Hohenzollern from becoming King of Spain.**** The French public was very much on the side of Napoleon III in this matter.

Out of Bismarck's presence, a French representative asked King Wilhelm not to give his consent to Leopold, and Wilhelm, not all that interested in the subject, agreed. So it appeared that war had been averted, but the French press rubbed salt into Wilhelm's decision by portraying it as a humiliation of Prussia, which was also Bismarck's opinion. With the French public ready for war, Napoleon III and French officials decided to press King Wilhelm to make it clear that he would not give his consent to a Hohenzollern ascending the Spanish throne in the future either. When the matter was put to Wilhelm, again without Bismarck's presence, he refused. The king sent a telegram to Bismarck in Berlin about what had happened and asked if Bismarck thought it best to release the information to the press. Bismarck released the telegram to the press, but in a heavily edited version, which showed the French demanding that the King of Prussia do as they wanted, but also showing Wilhelm as having insulted the French representative; that is, a representative of Napoleon III.***** Of course, the edited telegram succeeded in simultaneously stirring public emotions on both sides, which made war much more the likely outcome.

The German public was now angered, and the French public remained ready for war. On July 19, 1870 Napoleon III declared war on Prussia. This brought the south German states to Prussia's defense as Bismarck had envisioned in the secret treaties he had made with their rulers. Not that the treaties may have even mattered, as the German public rallied to Prussia. It was now GERMANS, not just Prussians, against France. (A Word History is below the notes)

* I'm using the term "nobles" and "noble families" so as not to only limit the matter to the various monarchies. Some noble families rose to prominence, and some did not.

** Just a reminder, the Hohenzollern family had ruled Prussia for centuries.

*** Napoleon III's wife, Eugénie, was born in Spain to a Spanish noble and his part Spanish wife.

**** King Wilhelm's position as King of Prussia, and the prestige that title carried, gave him much say in Hohenzollern family matters, and his advance consent was pretty much needed for Leopold to take Spain's throne. It seems though that Wilhelm did not especially see the matter in the same light as Bismarck; that is, that Prussian prestige was on the line.

***** For one thing, both the initial approach by the French representative to the king, and his subsequent approach, were beyond the usually accepted diplomatic customs. An ambassador usually spoke to another country's ambassador, a prime minster spoke to another prime minister, a ruler spoke to another ruler. In this case, the French bypassed this protocol.

WORD HISTORY:
Spiel-The ultimate origins of this word are uncertain. Presently I cannot trace this word back further than Old High German "spilon," which seems to have meant "dance, pass the time pleasantly." Old English (Anglo-Saxon) had "spillian/spilian," with the same general meaning, but also "play," which became a meaning in German. The English word may well have been borrowed from its Old Saxon (Low German) relative, a development which seems to have taken place centuries ago with Danish, Norwegian and Swedish. The word later died out in English. Both the German and Old English forms meant "to play." The German form eventually became "spielen," the verb form, and "Spiel," the noun form. Like our word "play," which was also present in Old English, and which overtook the Old English "spillian" in all meanings, the German word can mean "to play music," "to play games," etc. A "Spielzeug" is the German word for "toy." In English, "spiel" can be used in reference to music, "play a little spiel," but also "fast talk" or "sales pitch;" as in, "The sales lady gave me this spiel about how great her products were."

The German Question, Part Fifty-Two

"Bismarck" Part Four/A "Prelude To War With France"

After Prussia's defeat of Austria and the formation of the North German Confederation, Emperor Napoleon III of France was in a bit of a precarious situation. There were rumblings in France from people who wanted more liberties, thus keeping the possibility of a revolution very much on Napoleon III's mind. Foreign policy blunders, including an attempt to install a French-backed ruler in Mexico (which failed), gave continued hope to French revolutionaries. After much damage to his prestige, Napoleon III needed a success to gain the support of a solid majority of the French people.

While Prussia's position strengthened greatly with the defeat of Austria, the south German states remained outside of Prussia's control, although Bismarck secretly signed alliances with these states, which guaranteed mutual assistance in any war, the importance of which would soon be realized.

There were numerous and complex diplomatic maneuvers in the time between the Austro-Prussian War and the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War; too many to go into here, but just briefly, Napoleon III wanted allies against Prussia to help tie down Prussian forces. He used Austria's humiliation at the hands of Prussia to try to lure her to side with France in a war against Prussia, and further, to try to get Austria to have the south German states follow Austria's lead. Austria wanted Italy drawn into any alliance against Prussia, but Italy wanted all French troops withdrawn from Rome, where they stood guard in protection of the Papacy. A French withdrawal would have given Italians control of their designated capital, which still remained outside of the new Italian nation. This demand put Napoleon III in a bind. With unrest in France so prevalent, he did not want to stir the pot further by permitting Italy to occupy Rome and antagonize French Catholics (France was an overwhelmingly Catholic country). Also working against Napoleon III was the fact that Bismarck had worked out agreements with Russia, essentially guaranteeing that Russia would remain neutral in a Prussian war with France, or that Russia would actually go to war with Austria, if the Austrians sided with France.

Prior to the Austro-Prussian War, Bismarck had negotiated with Napoleon III (see previous articles for more detail) to keep France neutral. He offered to "consider" Napoleon's desire to take over Belgium and Luxembourg, and perhaps other (German) territory along the Rhine River.* Later, after Austria's defeat, Napoleon III's representative reminded Bismarck of his promise to "consider" territory for France. Again, Bismarck outwitted the French by skillfully getting the French representative to put the matter in writing (no recording devices in those days). Bismarck then later released this letter, which brought cries of indignation from others against Napoleon III.** As to Luxembourg, Napoleon III tried to buy it from the Dutch king, but Prussia and other German states strongly objected, bringing the parties to the point of war. A special meeting of the major European powers in London resolved the matter by guaranteeing Luxembourg's independence and neutrality, and by requiring that Prussia withdraw its troops. Napoleon III lost out on territory again.***/****

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

* Belgium was not German territory, but at that point in time, Luxembourg, a personal possession of the Dutch king, was still a member of the German Confederation. Napoleon III was also interested in other German areas on the west bank of the Rhine River. Napoleon III made a serious error (from the French point of view) by not getting Bismarck to commit to territorial adjustments, rather than Bismarck's foxy "consideration" of such. (See Note 2)

** Napoleon III had earlier guaranteed the independence of Belgium. His new attempts to take over Belgium brought him sharp rebuffs from Great Britain; thus alienating another potential ally against Prussia.

*** Luxembourg, which was granted independence after the Prussian victory over Austria and the dissolution of the German Confederation, became a member of the (German) Customs Union ("Zollverein") and had Prussian troops stationed there. If Napoleon III had succeeded in buying Luxembourg, those troops would have been removed, giving him a better strategic position in any potential war with Prussia. On the other hand, Bismarck's military advisers naturally wanted to retain their military presence in Luxembourg, which is along the northern French border.

**** Napoleon III also lost the "public relations" war, as he was seen, correctly, as trying to take over other countries. While we are now approaching the point in this series where the Germans came to be seen by much of the world as the aggressors, up to that point, and for a couple of centuries previous, France was often, but not always, seen as an aggressor nation, and this certainly was not limited to Napoleon or his nephew, Napoleon III. That does not mean that other nations didn't periodically have similar aggressive intentions,"  back then.

WORD HISTORY:
Blitz-This word is more commonly part of the World War Two era compound German word "Blitzkrieg" in English, or just "blitz" for the American football term "to rush the quarterback." In England the shortened form "Blitz" has been used for the German air attacks on the United Kingdom in 1940 during World War Two, commonly known there as "the Blitz." This word goes back to Indo European "bhleg," or some sources say "bhel," which had the meaning of "shine, burn." This spawned the Old Germanic verb form "blikkatjan," which meant "to brighten, to flash" (this also gave Old English the noun "blæcern," meaning "candle light"). This then gave Old High German "blecchazzen," with the same meaning. Later this became "bliczen," which then simply meant "to flash," with the obvious progression to modern "blitzen," and the derived noun form "Blitz," which means "lightening" (all German nouns are capitalized; thus the capital "B"). Just for your information, the meaning of the names in the Christmas story with the reindeer "Donner" and "Blitzen," is "Thunder" and "Lightening."

The German Question, Part Fifty-One

"Bismarck" Part Three/C "A Sad Parting"

France's Napoleon III now mediated between Austria and Prussia and between Italy and Austria. Napoleon III had long sought to keep some sort of power balance between Austria and Prussia and their role in German affairs. He was surprised by Prussia's decisive victory so early in the military conflict, as he had calculated that Austria would defeat Prussia in any war. Some Prussians wanted an out-and-out march on Vienna, even followed by an occupation of the Austrian capital, and former capital of the German Empire, but Bismarck and cooler heads in Prussia knew that such a move could well bring Napoleon III to side with Austria and declare war. This would have brought a two front war to Prussia, with only Italy as an ally, and as I noted in the previous part, the Italians had had a mixed record in their military operations against Austria up to that point. Further, many Germans, although undoubtedly more in the southern states, did not want to see Austria, their traditional leader, be humiliated by Prussia. Any such humiliation could have caused deep divides in the German public at a time when Prussia sought unity. An armistice limited the possibility of any such developments.

Bismarck did not seek territory from Austria. He also wanted to form a new Prussian-led confederation of the German states, BUT this time totally excluding Austria. So, without going into all of the negotiating ploys, here was the end result of the treaty process and other events:

First, the German Confederation was dissolved. Liechtenstein became independent (as it remains today).* Luxemburg also became independent, although it joined the Customs Union ("Zollverein"), giving it close ties to Prussia (and eventually the new German nation).** Italy received, and then annexed, the Italian populated region of Venetia (thereafter northeastern Italy) from Austria; Prussia annexed Schleswig and Holstein (then combined into one province "Schleswig-Holstein"); Prussia annexed other German states, or parts thereof; Prussia wanted Saxony, but it remained as an independent state (see next); Prussia formed the new "North German Confederation" ("Norddeutscher Bund"), which included Saxony, but which excluded (at Napoleon III's insistence) the southern German states, and Austria was committed to remain OUT OF German affairs. The Austrian Empire's very existence now came into question. The always present potential for ethnic unrest in the multi-ethnic empire led to a sharing of power with Hungary; thus the resulting 1867 compromise, known as the "Ausgleich," in German, brought about the "Austro-Hungarian Empire," or simply "Austria-Hungary" (also called the "Dual Monarchy"). The Habsburg ruler remained as King of Hungary, and foreign policy and military matters were run by the "Empire," but Hungary ran its own matters otherwise (it had its own legislative body which met in Budapest).***

The German population of the Austrian Empire still saw themselves as "Germans," but this began the process by which Austrians eventually would be seen separately, except for a minority point of view. More on that later. (A Word History is below the notes)

* The dissolution of the German Confederation resulted in Liechtenstein becoming an independent country, so we have another answer to our "German Question," and it does not include Liechtenstein, although its language and customs remain German in character.

** The economic relationship between Luxemburg and Germany remained, but, with Luxemburg as an independent country, Luxemburg was not obliged to follow German law nor foreign policy. So we have another "detachment" to help answer the "German Question."

*** Initially "Buda" and "Pest" were two separate cities, which did not formally unite into "Budapest" until 1873.

WORD HISTORY:
Waltz-This word came into English in the 1780s for a type of dance. It goes back to Indo European "wel," which carried the notion of "roll, turn, revolve." This gave Old Germanic "waltjanan," with the same basic meaning. This then gave Old High German "walzan," and eventually gave German the verb "walzen," and the noun "Walzer," the term for the energetic dance which involved what appeared as "rolling" or "revolving" as people danced. By the 1820s, the word began to also take on the added meaning in English of "move about nimbly," and eventually "to navigate sticky or delicate questions with adeptness." By the way, English once had the related verb "wyltan/wieltan," meaning, "to roll."  

The German Question, Part Fifty

"Bismarck" Part Three/B "The Day of Reckoning"

Now we need to go back to "Schleswig-Holstein." After the two German super powers defeated Denmark in 1864, they made an agreement regarding these two provinces in 1865. Both provinces became members of the (Prussian-run) Customs Union ("Zollverein"), although Austria herself was not a member. There were various stipulations, but basically Prussia was to administer Schleswig, the northern most province, and Austria was to administer Holstein. This left Austrian-run Holstein as the peanut butter and jelly between a slice of Prussian bread in Schleswig, and another slice of Prussian bread in Prussia proper.* Austria agreed to permit Prussian access to Schleswig through Holstein. The two powers agreed to resolve any differences over administration between themselves. Put simply, there were disagreements, and Austria called for the issues to be resolved by the German Confederation. This was a clear violation of the agreement with Prussia, although a violation that gave Bismarck his reason to act against Austria.

The overall march to war was highly complex, but essentially events began unfolding when Italy moved numerous military units to the border of the Austrian controlled Italian regions coveted by the Italians. Austria called up troops to reinforce its units in these same regions. This gave Italy cause to order a full mobilization of its army, and with Prussia committed to support Italy,** the Prussians mobilized their army shortly thereafter. Most of the representatives in the assembly at Frankfurt wanted matters to calm down, and for all sides to demobilize their forces, although most supported Austria, still the symbolic leader of Germany. The few supporters of Prussia among the German states had only small military forces, but Austria's potential to gain non-German allies was slim (Russia especially was reluctant to get involved on Austria's side, due to past differences between the two powers, although the Russians were alarmed by Prussia's growing power among the German states***). Austria agreed to the calls for demobilization of any troops that were seen as threatening Prussia, but she could not do the same with Italy, which was in no way connected with the German Confederation. Bismarck cried "Foul!" He sent Prussian troops into Holstein in response to Austria's calling the Holstein provincial assembly into session about the dispute with Prussia. Austrian troops, far from Austria (which was much further south), and sandwiched between Prussian forces, withdrew from Holstein.

This prompted Austria to call for the German Confederation to mobilize forces against Prussia, a process that began. Prussia declared that such actions dissolved the German Confederation (saying it, did not truly make it so), but the Prussians also offered new constitutional reform and reorganization for a new federation of all the German states.

Prussia pressured the other German states to accept its reform plan, but they rejected it (most favored Austria, anyhow). In mid June 1866, Prussia sent troops into the states of Saxony, Hanover, and Hessen-Kassel, and the war began. The Prussian forces dominated the forces of these states, except those of Hanover, which inflicted a defeat on the Prussian army in late June, but then surrendered to Prussia shortly thereafter, when more Prussian forces arrived.

Relatively small Prussian forces kept forces of other Austrian allies, like Bavaria, tied down and thus out of the main fighting, except for Saxony. The rapidly mobilized Prussian forces advanced into Saxony. The Saxons moved their army (relatively small) out of Saxony and into neighboring Bohemia (a Habsburg possession) to join the slowly mobilizing Austrian forces which were assembling for an eventual attack on the Prussians in Silesia.**** The Prussians struck in early July with three converging armies inflicting a devastating defeat on the Austrian forces at the "Battle of Königgrätz" (Sadowa, in Czech), with the Austrians losing 40-45,000 men (killed, wounded, captured), while total Prussian losses were less than 10,000. This one major battle brought agreement between the two German states for France's Napoleon III to begin mediation between the belligerents for an end to the war. Napoleon III accepted the role.

While the Austrians suffered at the hands of the Prussians, they enjoyed far more success against the Italians, who suffered a major defeat early on (June 24) in the Austrian held region of Veneto at the "Battle of Custoza" (near the city of Verona), although the Italians did achieve a victory in the Trentino region (about 20 miles from the city of "Trento") on July 21 against the Austrians. Peace negotiations required that the Italians yield any gains in the area.

Next, the war ends....... (A Word History is below the notes)

* You can see the almost hopeless military situation for Austrian troops in Holstein, if any war developed between Austria and Prussia. You know what happens when you press two slices of bread against a layer of peanut butter and jelly......SQUISH!

** Remember, Italy and Prussia had an agreement to support one another in a war against Austria.

*** Russia siding with Austria would then have forced Prussia to divide its forces, just as Austria was already doing, due to the threat from Italy.

**** For those who have been following this series, you may recall Austria's long held desire for more territory in Silesia going back to the wars between Austria and Prussia when led by Maria Theresa and Frederick the Great, respectively.

WORD HISTORY:
Beer-The ultimate origin of this word is uncertain. Some linguists believe it came from Latin "bibere," meaning "to drink," which then went back to Indo European "po/poi," which then had a variant "bibo," which gave Latin "bibere," and the noun form "biber," meaning "a drink." The theory is that West Germanic borrowed the word from Latin, giving Anglo-Saxon "beor," although Anglo-Saxon (and Germanic generally) used the ancestral form of "ale" as a general word for "beer," in those times. Another theory has the word derived from Old Germanic "beuwoz," a form of which meant "barley." Still another theory has "beer" coming from Indo European "beus/bheus," which meant "sediment, yeast sediment," which then gave Old Germanic "biuzan" or "biuzaz," which meant "beverage made from yeast;" thus, "beer." To be honest, I don't know, as all are certainly possible; however, the word "beer" only appears in the Germanic languages (see other Germanic forms below), except for borrowings, so perhaps the last theory is correct, that it developed in Germanic. The Latin ancestor is possible, but the problem I have with it is, most sources cite a West Germanic borrowing during the 500s (A.D.). The Anglo-Saxons had already established themselves in Britain (what would be called 'England') by that time, and while they could have borrowed it from the continental Germanic relatives (or vice versa), that makes it a little more of a stretch. Anyway, Old English "beor" later became "ber/bere," before the modern spelling. German, Dutch, and West Frisian have "Bier/bier," all with similar pronunciations to the English form (the German form has a capital "B," as all modern German nouns are capitalized), Low German Saxon has "beer," and Icelandic has "bjór." Danish, Norwegian and Swedish all use a form of "ale" for their word for "beer."

The German Question, Part Forty-Nine

"Bismarck" Part Three/A- "The Day Of Reckoning"

The events prior to, and during the "Austro-Prussian War" ("Der Deutsche Krieg," in German, "the German War"), were far more complex than what I'll write about here.

Bismarck saw an opportunity for Prussia to place Austria in a sort of military vise grip. With a newly united Italy still desiring certain Italian majority provinces that were controlled by Austria, Bismarck made a pact with the Italians. The pact essentially committed Prussia and Italy to assist each other in any war either had with Austria; a war that seemed more likely to start between Italy and Austria, at that time. Earlier, Bismarck secured French neutrality in any conflict between Prussia and Austria,* with France's "Napoleon III" believing that any war between the two German states could only benefit France's territorial desires along the western areas of the German states (like Luxembourg), and further, he believed that Austria would defeat Prussia in any war.**

Prussia enjoyed several advantages over Austria. The Prussian army was large, well trained, well led, well equipped***, had a significant number of well trained reservists, and individual regiments had their personnel located close by, for quick mobilization. By this time, 1866, railways had developed throughout the German states, although somewhat unevenly, but Prussia's railways were especially well developed, giving Prussia's army the ability to quickly move troops from one location to another, and then to also quickly supply those troops. On the other hand, Austria faced the prospect of a two-front war; against Prussia in the north, and against Italy in the south. Further, the unrest of her many non-German subjects, and their resentments, made many of Austria's infantry units, where there were numerous non-Germans, a bit suspect in terms of reliability. Austria's cavalry and artillery forces, however, were renowned for their prowess. The threat of unrest also made the Austrians choose to keep many military personnel far from their regimental commands in an attempt to prevent armed organized uprisings. This meant it took time for Austria to mobilize its army, as many troops had to travel considerable distances to join their units, and Austria's railways were somewhat less well developed in certain parts of her vast territories than Prussia's.

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

* France was ruled by Napoleon's nephew, "Napoleon III." Bismarck and Napoleon III had a one-on-one meeting, at which time Bismarck secured France's neutrality.

** Luxembourg was a member of the German Confederation and the Zollverein (the Customs Union, led by Prussia), close to Prussian territory, and actually had, at times, Prussian troops stationed there. Any Prussian defeat could have helped France in their desire for Luxembourg. France also was interested in Belgium.

*** Prussia's infantry were equipped with bolt-action, breech-loading guns, which allowed their infantry to lie down and fire, making them more difficult targets. They could also fire at a faster rate than Austria's muzzle-loading guns, which pretty much required infantrymen to stand to reload. While the Austrian military leaders saw the effectiveness of the Prussian guns during their joint-effort with Prussia in the war with Denmark, they seemingly did not grasp the significance of the more modern gun, or Austria's strained financial resources may have forced them to abandon any plan to re-equip, as thousands of new guns would have been costly.

WORD HISTORY:
Stone (Stein)-For those of you who have been following this series on the Germans, you probably have noticed my tendency to do words which were borrowed into English from German, or words that we associate with Germans. While "stone" was NOT borrowed, its Germanic ancestor also gave German "Stein," which besides having the same meaning as the English word, also means "stone/ceramic beer mug," but only in certain regions of the German-speaking world. It is a shortened form of German "Steingut," or "stoneware." "Stein" is a word very much present in English. It is perhaps more prevalent in American English from the large number of German immigrants who came here.

This word goes back to Indo European "stai," which meant "stone." (Note of interest: It also had the meaning, perhaps the original meaning, of "hard substance, solidity," which gave some of our more distant relatives; that is, further down the "family tree," words associated with that concept, such as Greek "stear" which means "tallow;" that is "solidified fat," and Latin "stiria," which means "icicle." The Old Germanic offshoot was "stainaz," which then gave Old English "stan," with a long "a" sound, unlike the modern short form for "Stanley." Later it was spelled "ston," before acquiring its modern form. The verb form, as in "to stone someone to death," developed in English during the 1100s. It is VERY much present in the Germanic languages: as noted above, German has "Stein," Low German has both "steyn" and "steen," Dutch has "steen," Frisian has "stien," Danish and Swedish both have "sten," Norwegian has "stein," and Icelandic has "steinn." The term "Stone Age" originated in the 1830s from Danish archeologist Christian Jürgensen Thomsen.

The German Question, Part Forty-Eight

"Bismarck" Part Two "Prelude To Austrian-Prussian Reckoning"

German unification came about with what many historians call, "The (German) Wars of Unification," a series of three wars. I've already covered the war carried out jointly by Prussia and Austria against Denmark in Parts 45 and 46, in this series. Now I'll get into the real crux of the matter; that is, the day of reckoning between Prussia and Austria over political dominance of German affairs. I suppose I'd have to say that the long build up to a major showdown between the two German "super states" is more important than even its aftermath, since this confrontation set in motion the inevitability of German unification (in my opinion).

First, a recap:
For centuries, Austria was the leading German state among literally hundreds (at times, thousands) of German states. The Habsburg family rulers, which ruled Austria, were also chosen for centuries as the emperors of an increasingly weak German Empire.* Over time, however, the Habsburgs expanded their holdings to areas of eastern and southeastern Europe where Germans were either a distinct minority, if even present at all. The Protestant Reformation brought the spread of Protestantism, primarily Lutheranism, to much of the northern German lands, where Protestants often became a majority. Austria and the other southern German states remained heavily Catholic. Prussia, a north German state, largely Protestant, and ruled by the Hohenzollern family, gradually became a military power, challenging Austrian power over German affairs. Napoleon defeated the Germans and dissolved their weakened empire, occupying many of the German lands, and even annexing some German territory to France. This all began to build a sense of German national patriotism, rather than the regional patriotism long in place in the German states, and culminated in the defeat and ouster of Napoleon from the German territories. While many Germans wanted a new unified German nation formed after Napoleon's defeat, the rulers of the various states sought to keep their own local and regional power. A confederation was formed among the German states, but with little power over truly "German" affairs. Austria headed this confederation. In the effort to truly unite Germans, many Germans wanted Austria to relinquish control over a large portion of their non-German lands, something which the Habsburgs refused to do. Prussia formed a "customs union" ("Zollverein") to expedite trade among an increasing number of the states, but without Austria.

The Revolutions of 1848 brought demands for German unification and constitutional law, but what looked to be a sure thing, proved to be illusory, although the ideas put forward during that time did not all die. The Revolutions, while they essentially failed, also showed the strains on the Habsburg holdings, as their non-German subjects rose in revolt in many places. While order was restored, it seemed only a matter of time before the Habsburgs would have to grant some degree of independence to their non-German subjects, giving Germans the increased hope that Austria would then either lead (mainly preferred by "South" Germans), or become a part of, a newly united Germany. Later still, Austria had to confront a developing threat from their Italian holdings in northern Italy, as Italians, like the Germans, were increasingly pressing for a unified nation, and part of what many Italians saw as that unified nation included the Austrian holdings.** This forced the Habsburgs to deploy considerable military resources in that area; a fact clearly noted by Bismarck and his advisers in Prussia. By 1861, Italians declared Victor Emanuel II (Vittorio Emanuele, in Italian) as King of Italy, although not all areas desired by Italians were included in the new nation, including, interestingly, ROME!!! The Austrian possessions also remained outside of Italian control, but Austria was well aware of Italian designs on these areas, where the Austrians continued to maintain substantial military forces.

Railroads began to develop throughout the German states beginning in the 1830s. This faster means of travel helped to further unite Germans, in both travel and trade, as many Germans began to pay tourist-type visits to areas far beyond their old regional homelands. Visits to old castles, battlefields, and other historical venues began the development of a whole new industry in the German economy, and gave Germans a sense of common pride and history.

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

* In this case, I'm not only meaning weak in military power, but also weak in structure and the emperor's ability to get Germans to act in concert with his wishes.

** This was "sort of" a reverse of the situation in northern Germany with Schleswig and Holstein, which were seen by Germans as part of Germany, but were controlled, to varying degrees, by the King of Denmark.

WORD HISTORY:
Ale-This goes back to the Indo European root "alu," which had the notion of "magic, possession, intoxication." This gave Old Germanic "alu(th)," which then gave Old English "ealu," which meant "ale," or just "beer." Interestingly, English had both words, "ale" and "beer," and they were interchangeable, or perhaps regional, but "beer" (which I'll be covering in a future Word History) did not develop a distinct meaning until the 1500s, when hops began to be used in the brewing process. Forms of the word in English's closest West Germanic relatives (German, Dutch, Frisian) have died out in the standard languages, as they now only use forms of the word "beer," although I wouldn't be surprised that forms survive in dialects, and I did find "aal" for Dutch and some Low German versions, but whether this is truly used very often in modern times, I don't know. But English's North Germanic relatives still use their own forms: Danish and Norwegian have "øl" and Swedish and Icelandic have "öl." By the way, an interesting side note; "ale" also meant "a celebration, with lots of ale." This still survives in the last part of the compound word "bridAL," which meant a "celebration of a wedding, wedding feast." Poor woman, she just got married and her husband's stewed to the gills! ("Hic!...Ah...'scuse me.")

The German Question, Part Forty-Seven

"Bismarck" Part One

Bismarck is such a historical figure that many, many books and articles have been written about him. I'll only scratch the surface here.

Fürst Otto von Bismarck (Fürst=Prince) should at least be a name known to many of you, even if you haven’t been particularly fond of history. Just a note before I go on: Bismarck was fluent in English and he was a staunch Lutheran.

Bismarck was born in what is the modern German state of "Sachsen-Anhalt," so he was a northern German, and descended from a line of "Junkers."* He became a member of the Prussian "Landtag" (the name of the Prussian parliament/legislature), known for his conservatism, if not his downright reactionary beliefs, as he was a devoted supporter of the Prussian monarchy. During the 1850s  Bismarck represented Prussia at the assembly of the German Confederation, which met in Frankfurt; where for a time, he was fearful that German unification would dilute Prussian power and independence. His views gradually softened, and he came to view German unification as a good thing, as long as it was led by Prussia and not Austria. He also learned the arts of politics and diplomacy to an incredible degree, finding that wheeling and dealing (along with ruthlessness) was more effective than pure, "in-your-face" ideology. Eventually, due to diplomatic appointments for Prussia, he met many foreign leaders and diplomats, as he was sent to Russia, France and England.

Liberal reforms in Prussia since the "Revolution of 1848" had given the elected legislative body the right of approval of budgetary items, including military spending. Wilhelm I, then King of Prussia, wanted a reorganization of the Prussian army, but the delegates initially balked at his proposed military budget, then out and out defeated it. The jilted king seriously considered abdication, but then decided to appoint Bismarck as both "Ministerpräsident" and Foreign Minister ("Aussenminister," in German)** in September 1862. With Prussian constitutional law still relatively new, Bismarck found ways around the representatives. First, his government position was not responsible to the elected delegates, but rather only to the king. Further, he chose to ignore the representatives and their defeat of the king's proposed budget, and he simply declared the previous year's budget in force. The representatives cried "foul," but to no avail. Over time there were many more confrontations, and the representatives repeatedly asked that the king dismiss Bismarck, but the king refused, as this would then have encouraged the delegates to challenge any appointments made by the king.

Bismarck is famous for his statement about Prussia's policies, made shortly after his appointment to office: "Speeches and majority decisions will not decide the great issues of the time...but blood and iron" ("Blut und Eisen").*** So you can see in this one statement Bismarck's contempt for the legislative body, as well as his willingness to use force. The use of force would come to pass.

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

* "Junker" is a contraction of the words "jung" (young, the "j" is pronounced as "y") and "Herr" (lord, or gentleman). The Junkers were a class, usually of lesser nobles, who had estates in Prussia, most often in the northeastern part of Prussia. They tended to be associated with the military, often, but not always, even hiring themselves out to various entities for military adventures in times long past; that is, they were mercenaries. Some trace back to the time of the Middle Ages, especially when German knights were off fighting numerous Slavic and Baltic peoples and colonizing areas in northeastern Europe, receiving land (what became their estates) for their meritorious military service or as "payment" for having served some landed noble who had hired their services (see: http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2010/04/german-question-part-nine.html ). Other Junker families do not go back quite that far in time, and Bismarck's family seems to have achieved that status in the 1500s. Over the centuries, the Junker families became less associated with being military mercenaries; however, they often maintained their connections to the Prussian, then the overall German, military, with many holding key positions in the army. With the gradual easing of the mercenary image, they became highly respected in Prussian/German society as officers of the army. Others, while more loosely associated with the army (served and held rank, but were not active throughout their lives), were seen more as country squires, or gentlemen. Politically they were known for their conservatism.

** Foreign Minister is the American equivalent to "U.S. Secretary of State."

*** "Supposedly" Bismarck actually said these in reverse order, "Iron and Blood," but I wasn't there and I didn't see it on the "Six O'clock News," so hey, what can I say?

WORD HISTORY:
Iron-This word goes back to Indo European "isr" (long "i") and/or "eis," which seems to have meant "strong, powerful" and therefore, "holy." Iron was not in use when the Indo European dialects grew apart, so there was no general word for the metal. It is "assumed" that Old Germanic borrowed a form of the word from Celtic,^ that language having developed an offshoot from the Indo European word, as "isarnon." This then gave Old Germanic "isarnan," which then gave Old English "isaern," and later, when the "s" sound died out, "iren" and finally the modern version "iron." The meaning initially had to do with the metal, and then it was used in reference to weapons made of iron, then to shackles made of iron (used in the plural "irons"), the use for a vitamin in the diet seems to be from the latter part of the 1600s, and the use for a golf club came along in the mid 1800s. The use of a "heated flat, wedged piece of iron to smooth clothing" seems to date to the early 1800s with that specific name. The verb form was derived from the noun in the early 1400s, initially with the meaning "make from iron, cover with iron," then in the mid 1600s, "to put someone in chains or shackles (irons) to contain them," but ultimately the main modern meaning came to be, "to use a heated flattened piece of iron to smooth out clothing" (although the 'put in shackles' meaning is still used somewhat). German has "Eisen," Low German has "Iesen," Dutch has "ijzer," West Frisian has "izer," Swedish has "järn," Norwegian and Danish both have "jern," and Icelandic has "járn," all meaning "iron," the noun for the metal.

^ Celtic is a branch of the Indo European languages. It is represented in modern times, for example, by Welsh, Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic, and Breton (from the Brittany region of France).

The German Question, Part Forty-Six

"German Unification" Part One/B "Wars With Denmark"

I will be covering Otto von Bismarck's rise next, but first I want to finish the "Wars With Denmark." This will require in this article that I skip ahead to the time when Bismarck had already become the Minister President of Prussia. Further, as I noted in the first part of this section, the history of this whole conflict over Schleswig and Holstein is extremely complex, but the "devil is in the details," and try though I might, it is difficult to keep this simple.*

The question of Danish succession still lingered as the childless King Frederick VII grew older. The Danes believed that Schleswig was governed by Danish law and, therefore, Danish succession. The German view remained that any heir had to be male and passed on by the male line, not the female line. Holstein was not really in contention on this matter, as it was a member of the German Confederation, although it was a possession of Denmark (see further below). A complicated set of actions eventually conferred the future crown of Denmark AND Schleswig upon Christian of Glücksburg (who would become King Christian IX), but he was not a direct male heir, as he was related from the female line, and initially he had not been an heir to the throne of any country or province. King Frederick VII, whose childlessness had brought the whole matter to such a fever pitch, approved Christian as his heir. From the point of view of the Danes, the matter was settled.

Not long after the "First Schleswig War" ended, Frederick VII "granted" (decreed is a better word) a constitution that really did little to change his overall power. Later, the Danish assembly (or parliament) passed their own version of a constitution, also covering the Danish provinces outside of Denmark. This was rejected by Prussia and Austria on technicalities, and later also by the entire German Confederation, as the aim of the Germans was to continue to pry the provinces, especially Schleswig, away from any kind of Danish rule. The Danes had the opposite aim; that is, to tie Schleswig, and for some Danish nationalists, even Holstein, more closely to Denmark. There were numerous claims and counter claims during the years, but there was an agreement in London among several of Europe's powers, that Holstein and Lauenburg would have a new line of succession when King Frederick passed on, and not that of Frederick's heir. However, the two provinces would remain as Danish possessions. Schleswig, on the other hand, would be bound by the Danish succession law, but the Danes could not tie the province closer to Denmark than was Holstein.

In 1863, Frederick VII died, bringing Christian to the throne, as King Christian IX. A new Danish constitution awaited the new monarch's signature. The problem was, the constitution stipulated that parliament would govern both Denmark AND Schleswig. While Schleswig would still have its own provincial legislative body, this all amounted to an annexation of Schleswig to Denamrk. This violated the agreement between the various European powers made in London a number of years prior. This king signed on the dotted line. Frederick of Augustenburg ("Augustenborg" in Danish) was to become "Duke Of Holstein." Years earlier, when the contentious issue of Danish succession was being debated, he claimed Schleswig also, but later renounced that claim for a financial settlement. Now, here came Frederick again, claiming title to Schleswig.** In late 1863, the German Confederation, supported by Prussian Minister-President Bismarck, sent troops into Holstein to hold the province until matters were resolved (remember, Holstein was a member of the German Confederation, but a possession of the Danish crown). Bismarck got Austria to agree to resolve the Schleswig issue jointly with Prussia. Bismarck demanded that Denmark rescind its annexation, but that was rejected. Prussian and Austrian troops marched into Schleswig in early 1864. Bismarck's ultimate goal was annexation of the provinces to Prussia, as they were adjacent to Prussia, but Austria would not have participated in the war knowing that fact.

With German public sentiment strongly in favor of Schleswig and Holstein becoming independent of Denmark as a combined entity, Bismarck held the upper hand with fellow German power, Austria, whose leaders were concerned about Prussia's ever escalating power in German affairs, to the detriment of Austria. Overall German public opinion made it impossible for Austria to oppose the "public" Prussian position of independence for the provinces.

The two German powers defeated Denmark, with their forces actually entering Denmark itself. The war ("The Second Schleswig War") was over by August 1864, with a treaty signed in Vienna in October. Denmark renounced claim to the provinces, and it ceded control of the provinces, plus even more territory, to the administration of Austria and Prussia. Denmark lost approximately one million subjects, with as many as two hundred thousand being Danes. With Schleswig and Holstein detached from Denmark, German unification took another step forward. (A Word History is below the notes)

* I think back to my American History class in college, where the instructor (then in the process of earning his doctorate), when he came to the Civil War, was asked why he didn't get into the details of the war. He said it was all too complex, but that he could simplify it in three words, "The South lost." Of course in college, there was a separate class for those interested in just the Civil War.

** Frederick was pro-German, although he had been born in Copenhagen, Denmark. His pro-German position "might" have been taken because the Germans were more than willing to support his claim on Schleswig, an issue very sensitive to Denmark and to the Danish monarchy. Let's see, first he took a payoff to renounce his initial claim from prior years, now he's back renouncing his former "renouncement." You don't think Frederick was after anything or everything he could lay his hands on do you? Na, I can't believe that.

WORD HISTORY:
Throne-This goes back to Indo European "dher," and an alteration "dhrono," which had the notion of "support." The idea of support gave Greek "thronos," meaning "a seat, chair," which seems to have also developed the meaning "elevated seat, seat of honor;" thus, "throne." Latin borrowed the term from Greek as "thronus," which then passed to Latin-based Old French as "trone," and then in the 1200s, English borrowed the word as "throne." Just a note, German also borrowed the word from Old French and modern German has "Thron" (it is masculine; so, "der Thron").

The German Question, Part Forty-Five

“German Unification” Part One/ "Wars With Denmark"

First: The history of Schleswig-Holstein is far more complicated than what I will write about here, so if your background traces back to one of these areas, or to Denmark, I hope you won't feel slighted. Even with my generalizations, I hope no one will become too confused, as it is quite complex. Second: Remember the basics of feudalism; the lower level, vassals, pledged fealty and service (often militarily) to the upper level, a lord, who provided some sort of protection or basic living conditions. That lord's property, or area of control, was called a "fief" (no "To Catch a Fief" or "Fief Of Baghdad" jokes, please). This system had many levels, with lower level nobles/landowners pledging service to higher nobles, and at times, those nobles then doing the same with even higher nobles, even eventually reaching to the level of kings or emperors.

In the far northern part of what is now Germany (and near Denmark), there were two provinces, Schleswig and Holstein (now most commonly referred to in the combined "Schleswig-Holstein"), that were a center of controversy. Both regions had long, but somewhat varied, associations with Danish kings, who also carried the titles of (Danish) "Duke of Schleswig" and (German) "Count of Holstein" (Count=Graf, in German).* Centuries before, Schleswig had been considered a part of Denmark, but that changed during the Middle Ages, when it was a fief of the Danish king. Holstein, while a possession of the Danish king, was a fief of the German emperor (as mentioned about feudalism in the opening above), and it was a part of the Old German Empire (Holy Roman Empire), and later, it was a member of the German Confederation (the era where we are now in this series). Holstein was almost exclusively German in background (language and custom), but while Schleswig had a German majority, there was a minority of the population that considered themselves to be Danes, and a somewhat smaller percentage that were Frisian.** To complicate matters, in the 1400s, there had been an agreement between the Danish king and a number of German nobles stipulating that Holstein could not be annexed to Denmark, but giving the king the title of "duke," regarding Schleswig. It seems that the German nobles felt that with the separate title of duke, the province would retain some independence of the Danes, and indeed that happened, although it took a couple of centuries (see Note 2, below). Further, the two provinces were declared to be "forever undivided."*** (Separate note: There was actually a third province, (German) Saxe-Lauenburg, involved in some of these disputes, but only at times. It was a part of the German Confederation, but it too was a possession of the Danish king. It had been the king's possession since being handed over to Denmark by Sweden, which had gotten it from Prussia, following Napoleon's first defeat, in 1814. The province was exclusively German in population. [Told you, this stuff is confusing. No wonder they fought so many wars.])

The ouster of Napoleon from Germany inspired German nationalism, and that included German nationalism in Schleswig. The German population of the province began to make it known that they wanted to be part of any new German nation, which at that time appeared to be more imminent than it actually proved to be. The Danish population of the northern part of Schleswig (where they were a majority) likewise made it known that they didn't want to become German subjects. To keep this somewhat simple, the revolutions that erupted in 1848 led the Danish king to grant a constitution. As part of the Danish reorganization, the king and Danish nationalists wanted Schleswig to be incorporated into Denmark proper, although with a great deal of independence. This brought open challenges by the German population, which gained the support of Prussia.**** Further, there was that treaty from the 1400s, which the Germans now used to their advantage, since it stated that Schleswig could not be annexed to Denmark, and that Schleswig and Holstein could not be separated. The Danes in Denmark and the Danish population in Schleswig essentially wanted Schleswig and Holstein to be separated, with the boundary between the two provinces also becoming the boundary between Denmark and the German Confederation, or any new German state. The Germans argued that the old treaty didn't permit the two provinces to be separated, and that Schleswig should become part of the German Confederation, as Holstein already was. On their side, the Danes had a treaty from the 1700s where some European governments declared that the Danish king would always also assume the title of "Duke of Schleswig." As if these issues were not enough, there was much controversy over the succession to the Danish throne. Laws going back many centuries throughout the German states and Denmark did not permit female succession as rulers. The Danes had been debating allowing female succession, as one of their kings, Frederick VII, was childless. If the existing (traditional) law prevailed, this would have permitted a German-leaning noble to rule in Schleswig and Holstein. Danes wanted a new Danish law to prevail which permitted female succession, including in their possessions, Schleswig and Holstein, and there was a declaration of such a law by the Danes. Germans, of course, opposed the decree. This all added more fuel to the fire.

German nationalists in Schleswig and Holstein rose against Danish rule in 1848, establishing a separate government. In support, Prussia sent troops into the area which precipitated a war with Denmark (called "The First Schleswig War"). Prussia's action gave a boost to its prestige among most Germans, except mainly the Habsburgs of Austria, who wanted to see Prussia's influence over Germans diminished, so as to retain their own standing among Germans. The war dragged on for three years, including numerous ceasefires and negotiations (other European powers participated in the negotiations), before European powers got Prussia to agree to return Schleswig and Holstein to Danish possession, with Denmark essentially agreeing not to annex Schleswig. This was basically a Danish victory, but the actual issues remained unresolved.

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

* For those who have been following this series, and just for example, remember that the kings of England were also hereditary rulers of Hanover (Germany), but Hanover was not a part of England. Hanover was entitled to a vote in the election of the German emperor, so you had the King of England voting on who became German emperor. Remember too, King George I of England did not speak English, rather German, but his successors did speak English. In the case above, the King of Denmark had a seat in the German Confederation due to his possession of Holstein, which was a German state. Confused yet?

** The population of Schleswig had been becoming more and more "German" in nature. The spread of Lutheranism brought German language religious services to much of Schleswig, and also, over the course of a couple of centuries, German officials tended to run many of the local bureaucracies. Gradually, Low German overtook Danish in what had been majority Danish speaking parts of the province, but again, the province seems to have had at least a scant German majority for much of its history, even before this advance by German. While population patterns may not always work out this way, in the case of Schleswig, it was very reasonable, with increasing percentages of people considering themselves Danes, the closer an area was to Denmark proper.

*** This was an interesting situation. Since Schleswig was a fief of the king, his role as duke of the province made him a vassal to himself in his role as king. The "forever undivided" clause is difficult to understand (at least for me, duh!). Schleswig was considered Danish, while Holstein was conceded to be German. While both were possessions of the Danish king, they were in different spheres of influence right from the start. Since the agreement specifically forbade Denmark to annex Schleswig, the same had to be true of Holstein, simply by implication. If what happened to one, had to happen to the other, this was a controversy just waiting to develop. The text above will show how this played out.

**** By this time, Prussia dominated much of northern Germany, and the German populations of both Schleswig and Holstein felt an attachment to Prussia, and therefore, both wanted any new German nation to be led by Prussia and not Austria, a south German state. This certainly gave Prussia an incentive to help with the German situation in Schleswig.

WORD HISTORY:
Brat-Not as in "you little brat," but rather the shortened form of "bratwurst," which is commonly used in American English, usually in the plural, "brats." I'm not certain about usage in the rest of the English speaking world. "Wurst" was covered in a previous Word History. "Brat" goes back to Indo European "bhreue," which had to do with "cooking, heating, boiling, burning." This then gave Old Germanic "bredon/bredan," which meant "roast meat, roast flesh." This then gave Old High German "brado/brato/praten," with the same meaning. (By the way, it also gave Old English "braede," which meant "meat" and "braed" which meant "flesh," both of which later died out. The same base also gave German "Braten," meaning "roast.") This then gave German "Brät," meaning "lean meat, finely chopped veal or swine." By putting "lean, chopped veal or pork" into casings, this gave German "Bratwurst," the sausage we all know today. "Supposedly" the word was first borrowed into English from German in the early 1900s.