Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Need for Compromise

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Imperial German Army Between Kaiser and King

  • 96 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines military relations between Prussia and the non-Prussian kingdoms. Some Prussian leaders were less than satisfied with the division of military authority that had been agreed upon during unification, and there were periodic attempts to consolidate the Kaiser’s peacetime control over the non-Prussian contingents after 1871. Reactions to these attempts varied. The Saxons, all too aware that their military convention rested on shaky constitutional ground, raised few objections while consciously avoiding all discussion of their monarch’s Kommandogewalt with their Prussian counterparts. Because their kingdoms had retained more of their military independence, leaders in Munich and Stuttgart were more willing to rock the boat. The result was a series of confrontations between Berlin on the one hand and Munich and Stuttgart on the other, as Prussian proposals to set up imperial military structures, exchange officers between the state-based contingents, and introduce a common military justice code for the empire provoked fierce responses from south of the Main River. Bavarian and Württemberg opposition did not mean that Berlin was forced to abandon these projects. In fact, Bismarck was able to secure Bavarian acceptance to the appointment of Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm as inspector-general of southern Germany. Two decades later, Kaiser Wilhelm II and his namesake, King Wilhelm II of Württemberg, met at a hunting lodge where they agreed to create a single seniority list to regulate officer promotions in their two contingents. Yet military centralization was in every case bought with concessions to Munich and Stuttgart. In other words, and when it came to Germany’s system of military federalism, decision-making was not characterized by imperial decrees issued by the Kaiser, but rather by the finding of common ground between the empire’s Kontingentsherren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pritzelwitz to the Prussian war ministry, July 1, 1891, PA AA, R 2762. For the relevant articles in Bavaria’s Federal Treaty and the imperial constitution, see Ernst Rudolf Huber, ed., Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, vol. 2, Deutsche Verfassungsdokumente 1851–1900 (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1986), 331, 399.

  2. 2.

    Allgemeine Zeitung, September 5, 1891, attached to Eulenburg to the Foreign Office in Berlin, September 6, 1891, PA AA, R 2762. See also Lerchenfeld to the Bavarian foreign ministry, June 13, 1891, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 1147. The sense of relief felt by Bavarian leaders at how the matter was resolved is evident in Eulenburg to the Foreign Office in Berlin, June 30, 1891, PA AA, R 2762.

  3. 3.

    Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Das Deutsche Kaiserreich 1871–1918 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973), 151–52.

  4. 4.

    Gordon A. Craig, The Politics of the Prussian Army, 1640–1945 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964), 120ff.; Ernst Rudolf Huber, Heer und Staat in der deutschen Geschichte, 2nd ed. (Hamburg: Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt, 1943), especially 321ff.; Gerhard Ritter, Staatskunst und Kriegshandwerk. Das Problem des “Militarismus” in Deutschland, vol. 1, Die altpreußische Tradition (1740–1890) (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1954), 144ff. The reorganization of the army’s upper echelons in 1883 is examined in Eberhard Kessel, “Die Entlassung von Kameke und Stosch im Jahre 1883. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen militärischen Institutionen,” in Forschungen zu Staat und Verfassung. Festgabe für Fritz Hartung, ed. Richard Dietrich and Gerhard Oestreich (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1958), 441–58.

  5. 5.

    See Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:399.

  6. 6.

    Solms-Sonnenwalde to Bismarck, September 1, 1875, PA AA, R 3197.

  7. 7.

    Niethammer to the Bavarian foreign ministry, September 12, 1889, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 2858. For a similar assessment of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s visit to Dresden, see Strachey to the British Foreign Office, September 13, 1889, TNA, FO 68, file 174.

  8. 8.

    Könneritz to the Saxon foreign ministry, May 17/19, 1867, SHStA, Bestand 11248, file 7587; memorandum drafted by the Saxon minister-president, Karl von Metzsch-Reichenbach, October 1903, Bestand 10717, file 1032a. See also the footnotes accompanying the text of the Saxon military convention, in Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:292–94.

  9. 9.

    King Georg to Hausen, November 12, 1903, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 1032a. For the concerns of the Saxon military authorities, see the memorandum written by the Saxon war minister, September 17, 1903, SHStA, Bestand 12693, file 33; Krug von Nidda to the Saxon war ministry, October 20, 1903, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 1032a. Other Saxon leaders wanted to take advantage of the favourable impression that had been made on the Kaiser by the performance of the XII Corps during the fall manoeuvres to renegotiate the military convention. See, for example, Hohenthal to the Saxon foreign ministry, October 17, 1903, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 1032a.

  10. 10.

    Soden to Wächter, July 16, 1871, HStA S, Bestand E 50/05, file 205; Brincken to Bismarck, July 19 and 23, 1871, PA AA, R 2703.

  11. 11.

    Rosenberg to the Foreign Office in Berlin, July 1, 1871, PA AA, R 3353. For King Karl’s behaviour during the festivities accompanying the return of the Württemberg division from France, see also Hans Philippi, Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte 1871–1914 (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1972), 20–21.

  12. 12.

    Mittnacht to Wagner-Frommenhausen, July 2, 1872, HStA S, Bestand E 51, file 144.

  13. 13.

    Curt Jany, Geschichte der Preußischen Armee vom 15. Jahrhundert bis 1914, vol. 4, Die Königliche Preußische Armee und das Deutsche Reichsheer 1807 bis 1914, 2nd ed. (Osnabrück: Biblio, 1967), 127, 243, 268–69.

  14. 14.

    The imperial right of inspection was prescribed in Article Four of Saxony’s military convention, Article Five, sub-section three of Bavaria’s Federal Treaty, and Article Nine of Württemberg’s military convention, all of which are printed in Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:293, 331, 341. The wording of these articles was not identical. While Bavaria’s Federal Treaty spoke of “the duty and the right” of the Bundesfeldherr to inspect the Bavarian contingent, the military conventions with Saxony and Württemberg referred merely to his “right” of inspection under Article 63 of the imperial constitution.

  15. 15.

    Kaiser Wilhelm I’s cabinet order, June 14, 1871, attached to Daxenberger to Pergler von Perglas, August 10, 1871, GStA PK, HA III MdA, Rep. I, file 10516.

  16. 16.

    Harald Rüddenklau, “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik 1871 bis 1914” (PhD diss., Universität Regensburg, 1972), 43–45.

  17. 17.

    Copy of Kaiser Wilhelm I to Bismarck, June 9, 1871, attached to Herbert von Bismarck to Otto von Bismarck, April 8, 1888, PA AA, R 917.

  18. 18.

    See Article One of the military convention between Prussia and Württemberg, in Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:339.

  19. 19.

    Frank Lorenz Müller, Our Fritz: Emperor Frederick III and the Political Culture of Imperial Germany (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011), 94–99. For Friedrich Wilhelm’s calls for issuing an ultimatum to the South German kings, see his diary entry for November 16, 1870, in Heinrich Otto Meisner, ed., Kaiser Friedrich III. Das Kriegstagebuch von 1870/71 (Berlin: K.F. Koehler, 1926), 220–26.

  20. 20.

    Fries to the Bavarian war ministry, June 12, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 77688.

  21. 21.

    Werthern to Bray-Steinburg, June 20, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 77688. For the chancellor’s instructions and King Ludwig II’s consent to Friedrich Wilhelm’s appointment as inspector-general, see copies of Bismarck to Werthern, June 14, 1871, and Werthern to Bismarck, July 6, 1871, attached to Herbert von Bismarck to Otto von Bismarck, April 8, 1888, PA AA, R 917. For a detailed discussion of Bismarck’s efforts, see Rüddenklau, “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik,” 46–53.

  22. 22.

    Pranckh to Bray-Steinburg, July 22, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 77688.

  23. 23.

    Daxenberger to Pergler von Perglas, August 10, 1871, Thile to Bismarck, August 17, 1871, Bismarck to Thile, August 24, 1871, GStA PK, HA III MdA, Rep. I, file 10516. See also Rüddenklau, “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik,” 54–56.

  24. 24.

    King Ludwig II to Pranckh, October 4, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 2768. See also Rüddenklau, “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik,” 56–57.

  25. 25.

    King Ludwig II to Pranckh, June 29, 1872, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 2768.

  26. 26.

    Werthern to Bismarck, August 5, 1872, PA AA, R 2704.

  27. 27.

    Fenton to the British Foreign Office, August 29, 1872, TNA, FO 9, file 216.

  28. 28.

    Rosenberg to Bismarck, August 22, 1872, PA AA, R 3353. See also Petre to the British Foreign Office, August 19, 1872, TNA, FO 82, file 154. For a far less glowing description of the crown prince’s reception in the Württemberg capital, see Pfusterschmid to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, August 18, 1872, ÖStA HHStA, PA VI, box 35.

  29. 29.

    Report of the Prussian legation in Munich to Bülow, September 3, 1875, PA AA, R 2712.

  30. 30.

    Fenton to the British Foreign Office, July 9 and August 29, 1872, TNA, FO 9, file 216. For Ludwig II’s initial reaction to the news that Friedrich Wilhelm and his wife intended to holiday in Berchtesgaden, see Werthern’s diary entry for April 6, 1872, in Winfried Baumgart, ed., Ein preußischer Gesandter in München. Georg Freiherr von Werthern 1867–1888 (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2018), 148–49.

  31. 31.

    Soden to Üxkull-Gyllenband, September 26, 1878, HStA S, Bestand E 50/05, file 259.

  32. 32.

    Morier to the British Foreign Office, August 23, 1875, TNA, FO 9, file 227. For Ludwig II’s unexpected and uncharacteristic inspection of the Bavarian troops in August 1875—his last before his death in 1886—and the alienating impact of his personal dislike for Friedrich Wilhelm and Prussia on the men of his contingent, see also Christof Botzenhart, “Ein Schattenkönig ohne Macht will ich nicht sein.” Die Regierungstätigkeit König Ludwigs II. von Bayern (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2004), 183–85.

  33. 33.

    Rüddenklau, “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik,” 64–66.

  34. 34.

    Magnus to Bülow, September 1, 1875, PA AA, R 3356.

  35. 35.

    Drummond to the British Foreign Office, June 18, 1888, TNA, FO 9, file 260. Another foreign observer believed that Friedrich Wilhelm’s reputation, though still on the whole favourable, had suffered in South Germany because of the unpopularity of his wife, Empress Victoria. Deym von Strítez to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, June 22, 1888, ÖStA HHStA, PA IV, box 49. For the importance of the crown prince’s glittering military record in his popularity, especially in Bavaria, see Müller, Our Fritz, 127–34.

  36. 36.

    Friedrich Wilhelm’s diary entry for June 17, 1884, in Winfried Baumgart, ed., Kaiser Friedrich III. Tagebücher 1866–1888 (Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 2012), 457.

  37. 37.

    Württemberg’s military convention is printed in Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:339–42. For the reorganization of the Württemberg contingent following the Franco-Prussian War, see Robert Thomas Walker, “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations in the German Empire, 1870–1918” (PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 1974), 37–48.

  38. 38.

    Memorandum prepared in the Württemberg war ministry, October 21, 1906, HStA S, Bestand M 1/2, file 15. See also Joachim Fischer, “Das württembergische Offizierkorps 1866–1918,” in Das deutsche Offizierkorps 1860–1960, ed. Hanns Hubert Hofmann (Boppard am Rhein: Harald Boldt, 1980), 114–18.

  39. 39.

    As reported in Gasser to the Bavarian foreign ministry, September 16, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3031.

  40. 40.

    Gasser to the Bavarian foreign ministry, October 12, 1871, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3031.

  41. 41.

    Albedyll to Bismarck, December 2, 1876, together with Massow’s own justification for his transfer request, November 8, 1876, and the reaction of the commander of the XIII Corps, November 9, 1876, PA AA, R 3358.

  42. 42.

    Magnus to Bülow, December 14, 1876, PA AA, R 3358. For the Kaiser’s rejection of Massow’s transfer request, see Kaiser Wilhelm I to Schwartzkoppen, December 2, 1876, PA AA, R 3358. The affair is also discussed in Philippi, Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte, 28–29.

  43. 43.

    See Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:340.

  44. 44.

    Albert von Suckow, Aus Meinem Leben, typed manuscript, 86–88, HStA S, Bestand 660/045, file 1. An abridged version of the war minister’s memoirs was later published with the title Rückschau in 1909.

  45. 45.

    Pfusterschmid to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, March 18, 1873, ÖStA HHStA, PA VI, box 35. See also Wilhelm von Spitzemberg to Karl von Spitzemberg, January 19, 1873, HStA S, Bestand E 74, file 381. For Stülpnagel’s antagonistic behaviour in Stuttgart more generally, see Walker, “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations,” 48–51.

  46. 46.

    Roon to the Württemberg war ministry, October 31, 1871, with a draft of the “Regulativ über die Ressortverhältnisse zwischen dem Kriegsministerium und dem Generalkommando in Württemberg,” and Suckow’s reply to the Prussian war ministry, November 20, 1871, HStA S, Bestand M 1/2, file 4.

  47. 47.

    Memorandum composed in the Württemberg war ministry, November 28, 1873, and thereafter submitted to the council of ministers, HStA S, Bestand M 1/2, file 4.

  48. 48.

    King Karl of Württemberg to Tsar Alexander II of Russia, July 5, 1873, and Kaiser Wilhelm I to Albedyll, July 8, 1873, attached to Albedyll to the Foreign Office in Berlin, July 11, 1873, PA AA, R 3354. See also Bernhard Ernst von Bülow’s detailed report of the incident from Bad Ems to Balan, July 14, 1873, PA AA, R 3354.

  49. 49.

    Balan to Bülow, July 21, 1873, PA AA, R 3354. For both the incident and the subsequent negotiations between Berlin and Stuttgart, including the key role played by Württemberg’s minister-president, Mittnacht, see also Philippi, Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte, 21–24.

  50. 50.

    Tauffkirchen to the Bavarian foreign ministry, May 10, 1874, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3034; Magnus to Bismarck, January 31, 1875, PA AA, R 3356.

  51. 51.

    For King Karl’s heightened interest in military affairs after unification, see Magnus to Bismarck, May 29, 1874, PA AA, R 3355; Tauffkirchen to the Bavarian foreign ministry, June 3, 1874, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3034; Oswald von Fabrice to Nostitz-Wallwitz, May 11, 1878, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 2976; Magnus to Bülow, June 26, 1878, PA AA, R 3359.

  52. 52.

    Wesdehlen to Bismarck, September 25, 1885, and Wesdehlen to the Foreign Office in Berlin, November 14, 1885, PA AA, R 3380.

  53. 53.

    Albedyll to the Foreign Office in Berlin, November 26, 1885, forwarded to Wesdehlen, November 27, 1885, PA AA, R 3380. Although less pessimistic than Albedyll, Prussia’s envoy in Stuttgart agreed that it would be wise to work towards abolishing the Württemberg war ministry. Wesdehlen to Bismarck, December 7, 1885, PA AA, R 3380. For the renewed conflict over spheres of authority more generally, see Philippi, Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte, 72–74.

  54. 54.

    Tauffkirchen to the Bavarian foreign ministry, June 5, 1886, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3046; Wrede to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, June 11, 1886, ÖStA HHStA, PA VI, box 39-3. Whereas the Bavarian and Austro-Hungarian diplomats described Karl’s tone as menacing, the Prussian envoy in Stuttgart recalled that the king had smiled before making this comment. Wesdehlen to Bismarck, June 5, 1886, PA AA, R 3395.

  55. 55.

    Waldersee’s diary entries for September 9 and 24, 1890, in Heinrich Otto Meisner, ed., Denkwürdigkeiten des General-Feldmarschalls Alfred Grafen von Waldersee, vol. 2, 1888–1900 (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1922), 142–43, 147–49. For Waldersee’s fall from grace and his rejection of the Kaiser’s offer, see John C.G. Röhl, Wilhelm II: The Kaiser’s Personal Monarchy, 1888–1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 410–15.

  56. 56.

    Philippi, Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte, 74–81. With Mittnacht’s encouragement, Prince Wilhelm requested an audience with the Kaiser at the end of September. Prince Wilhelm to Kaiser Wilhelm II, September 25, 1890, PA AA, R 3386.

  57. 57.

    Tauffkirchen to the Bavarian foreign ministry, October 25, 1890, BayHStA, Abt. II, MA 3050.

  58. 58.

    Memorandum prepared in the Württemberg war ministry, October 21, 1906, HStA S, Bestand M 1/2, file 15. See also Walker, “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations,” 71–74.

  59. 59.

    Wesdehlen to Bismarck, June 16, 1883, PA AA, R 3380.

  60. 60.

    Fischer, “Das Württembergische Offizierkorps,” 114–16; Walker, “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations,” 74–80. For an example of the friction created by the appointment of younger Württemberg officers to senior command posts, see Pfusterschmid to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, February 26, 1876, ÖStA HHStA, PA VI, box 37.

  61. 61.

    Planitz to the Saxon war ministry, November 25, 1882, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 105.

  62. 62.

    Paul Sauer, Württembergs letzter König. Das Leben Wilhelms II. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1994), 39–54, 218–21. See also Frank Lorenz Müller, Royal Heirs in Imperial Germany: The Future of Monarchy in Nineteenth-Century Bavaria, Saxony and Württemberg (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), 169–71.

  63. 63.

    Schott von Schottenstein to Moser, October 6, 1893, HStA S, Bestand E 74, file 359.

  64. 64.

    Walker, “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations,” 91–95. Mittnacht was nonetheless fully aware that an agreement between the Kaiser and the King of Württemberg was imminent. See, for instance, the minister-president’s conversation with the Saxon military plenipotentiary in Berlin. Vitzthum von Eckstädt to the Saxon war ministry, November 15, 1893, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 121.

  65. 65.

    Eulenburg to Caprivi, October 2, 1890, PA AA, R 3386.

  66. 66.

    Hohenthal to Metzsch-Reichenbach, December 8, 1893, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 121.

  67. 67.

    Paul Sauer, Württemberg im Kaiserreich. Bürgerliches Freiheitsstreben und monarchischer Obrigkeitsstaat (Tübingen: Silberburg, 2011), 163–65. For the resolution of the Württemberg parliament, see Derenthall’s telegram to the Foreign Office in Berlin, October 30, 1900, and the stenographic report of the lower chamber’s deliberations printed in the Frankfurter Zeitung, October 31, 1900, PA AA, R 3385.

  68. 68.

    King Wilhelm II’s cabinet order, December 1, 1893, forwarded to Schott von Schottenstein, HStA S, Bestand M 1/1, file 58.

  69. 69.

    Soden to Mittnacht, December 28, 1893, HStA S, Bestand E 50/05, file 217.

  70. 70.

    Oswald von Fabrice to Metzsch-Reichenbach, January 14, 1894, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 1545a. Two years later, Saxon diplomats were still voicing concerns about the autonomy of Württemberg’s contingent. Hohenthal to Metzsch-Reichenbach, April 13, 1896, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 1545a.

  71. 71.

    Okolicsányi von Okolicsana to the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, January 24, 1894, ÖStA HHStA, PA VI, box 42-1.

  72. 72.

    Eulenburg to Caprivi, January 18, 1894, PA AA, R 3382. For the Bavarian criticism of King Wilhelm II’s “betrayal,” see also Vitzthum von Eckstädt to the Saxon war ministry, February 8, 1894, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 120.

  73. 73.

    Holleben to Caprivi, February 4, 1894, PA AA, R 3382. When it later became known in Munich that the Bebenhausen Convention had not in fact altered Württemberg’s military convention, Crailsheim was forced to apologize to Soden. Crailsheim to Soden, February 10, 1894, PA AA, R 3383.

  74. 74.

    Hans-Michael Körner, “‘Na warte Wittelsbach!’ Kaiser Wilhelm II. und das Königreich Bayern,” in Der letzte Kaiser. Wilhelm II. im Exil, ed. Hans Wilderotter and Klaus-Dieter Pohl (Berlin: Bertelsmann Lexikon, 1991), 31–42, especially 36–37. For Kaiser Wilhelm II’s relationship with the rulers of Bavaria and the other smaller German states, see also Röhl, Wilhelm II: The Kaiser’s Personal Monarchy, 127–28.

  75. 75.

    Vitzthum von Eckstädt to the Saxon war ministry, June 9 and August 18, 1896, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 124. For Ludwig’s speech, the resulting scandal, and the Bavarian prince’s “Canossa experience” during a meeting with Kaiser Wilhelm II in Kiel, see Müller, Royal Heirs in Imperial Germany, 176–79.

  76. 76.

    Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:330, 398.

  77. 77.

    Helge Brandt, “Zur Reform der Militärstrafgerichtsordnung 1898. Die Haltung der Parteien im Reichstag,” Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen 14 (1973): 7–30, here 8–11.

  78. 78.

    Crailsheim’s comments on draft legislation presented to the Bundesrat concerning military justice proceedings, forwarded to Gasser, June 16, 1881, BayHStA, Abt. II, BayG Dresden 3737.

  79. 79.

    Karl Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit. Gesellschaft und Politik während der Ära des Prinzregenten Luitpold in Bayern (Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1972), 381–84. See also Pritzelwitz to the Prussian war ministry, October 22, 1891, PA AA, R 2743; Drummond to the British Foreign Office, October 30 and November 11, TNA, FO 9, file 264.

  80. 80.

    Hohenlohe’s diary entry for October 31, 1895, in Karl Alexander von Müller, ed., Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst. Denkwürdigkeiten der Reichskanzlerzeit (Osnabrück: Biblio, 1967), 114–16. See also Craig, The Politics of the Prussian Army, 246; Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit, 385–86. Social Democratic criticism of the military authorities focused on the mistreatment of common soldiers by their superiors. See Andrew G. Bonnell, “Explaining Suicide in the Imperial German Army,” German Studies Review 37 (2014): 275–95, especially 283–89; Hartmut Wiedner, “Soldatenmißhandlungen im Wilhelminischen Kaiserreich (1890–1914),” Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 22 (1982): 159–99.

  81. 81.

    Hohenlohe’s diary entry for November 2, 1895, in Müller, Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst, 116–17; Reichlin’s written statement, dated April 4, 1896, attached to his report to Asch, April 30, 1896, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11135.

  82. 82.

    Kaiser Wilhelm II’s telegram to Eulenburg, August 13, 1896, in John C.G. Röhl, ed., Philipp Eulenburgs Politische Korrespondenz, vol. 3, Krisen, Krieg und Katastrophen 1895–1921 (Boppard am Rhein: Harald Boldt, 1983), 1731–32.

  83. 83.

    John C.G. Röhl, Germany without Bismarck: The Crisis of Government in the Second Reich, 1890–1900 (London: B.T. Batsford, 1967), 178–99. See also Hohenlohe to Holstein, August 5, 1896, in Norman Rich and M.H. Fisher, eds., The Holstein Papers: The Memoirs, Diaries and Correspondence of Friedrich von Holstein, 1837–1909, vol. 3, Correspondence, 1861–1896 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961), 645; Hohenlohe’s diary entry for August 8, 1896, in Müller, Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst, 251–52.

  84. 84.

    Kiderlen-Wächter to Eulenburg, August 10, 1896, in Rich and Fisher, The Holstein Papers, 3:647–48.

  85. 85.

    Kaiser Wilhelm II to Eulenburg, August 14, 1896, in Röhl, Philipp Eulenburgs Politische Korrespondenz, 3:1732–33.

  86. 86.

    Haag to Asch, May 31, 1895, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11134. For the Bavarian reaction to the Saxon government’s offer of cooperation, see Lerchenfeld to the Bavarian foreign ministry, January 21, 1891, Crailsheim to Safferling, February 18, 1891, and Safferling to Crailsheim, March 2, 1891, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11134.

  87. 87.

    Krosigk to the Prussian war ministry, November 6 and 28, 1896, PA AA, R 2753.

  88. 88.

    Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit, 397–99, 409–10.

  89. 89.

    Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit, 410–13.

  90. 90.

    Huber, Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, 2:402. For Lerchenfeld’s insistence on the acknowledgement of Bavaria’s reserve rights, see Lerchenfeld to Crailsheim, January 23, 1897, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11146.

  91. 91.

    Reichlin to Asch, May 5, 1897, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11146. For the Kaiser’s reaction to Bavaria’s opposition to the military justice code in the Bundesrat, see also Frederick Francis Campbell, “The Bavarian Army, 1870–1918: The Constitutional and Structural Relations with the Prussian Military Establishment” (PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 1972), 191–92.

  92. 92.

    Vitzthum von Eckstädt to the Saxon war ministry, April 30, 1897, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 125. The Saxon military plenipotentiary had himself become convinced that Bavaria would suffer the blame for what he foresaw as the draft law’s inevitable rejection. Vitzthum von Eckstädt to the Saxon war ministry, September 16, 1897, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 125.

  93. 93.

    Hohenthal to Metzsch-Reichenbach, February 1, 1897, SHStA, Bestand 10717, file 4694; Metzsch-Reichenbach to Hohenthal, October 29, 1897, SHStA, Bestand 11250, file 125. For the earlier attitudes of the two kingdoms towards the military justice reform, see Haag to the Bavarian war ministry, September 22, 1890, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11134; Holleben to Hohenlohe, May 22, 1895, PA AA, R 3383.

  94. 94.

    Berndt, “Zur Reform der Militärstrafgerichtsordnung,” 25–26. For the damage that Munich’s “particularist” demands did to public support for the Bavarian position, see Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit, 415–16.

  95. 95.

    Röhl, Germany without Bismarck, 243–44. The chancellor’s compromise proposal is outlined in Hohenlohe’s diary entry for October 28, 1897, in Müller, Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst, 397–98.

  96. 96.

    Lerchenfeld to the Bavarian foreign ministry, January 25, 1898, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11146. For the chancellor’s fear of a parliamentary solution, see Hohenlohe to Völderndorff-Waradein, September 21, 1898, in Müller, Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst, 460.

  97. 97.

    Prince Regent Luitpold to Kaiser Wilhelm II, February 18, 1898, Wilhelm II to Luitpold, March 14, 1898, and Luitpold to Wilhelm II, April 16, 1898, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11146. Luitpold’s consent to the creation of a special Bavarian senate in Berlin was given in Luitpold to Hohenlohe, November 24, 1898, BayHStA, Abt. IV KA, MKr 11146. See also Campbell, “The Bavarian Army,” 201–13.

  98. 98.

    Berndt, “Zur Reform der Militärstrafgerichtsordnung,” 23–25. The creation of the imperial military court and the process by which military justice was administered after 1900 are discussed in Edgar Graf von Matuschka, “Organisationsgeschichte des Heeres 1890 bis 1918,” in Handbuch zur deutschen Militärgeschichte 1648–1939, vol. 5, Von der Entlassung Bismarcks bis zum Ende des Ersten Weltkrieges (1890–1918), ed. Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Frankfurt am Main: Bernard & Graefe Verlag für Wehrwesen, 1968), 200–1.

  99. 99.

    For the argument that the imperial military justice ordinance represented a defeat for the South German kingdom, see Möckl, Die Prinzregentenzeit, 426–30.

References

  • Baumgart, Winfried, ed. Kaiser Friedrich III. Tagebücher 1866–1888. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgart, Winfried, ed. Ein preußischer Gesandter in München. Georg Freiherr von Werthern 1867–1888. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnell, Andrew G. “Explaining Suicide in the Imperial German Army.” German Studies Review 37 (2014): 275–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botzenhart, Christof. “Ein Schattenkönig ohne Macht will ich nicht sein.” Die Regierungstätigkeit König Ludwigs II. von Bayern. Munich: C.H. Beck, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, Helge. “Zur Reform der Militärstrafgerichtsordnung 1898. Die Haltung der Parteien im Reichstag.” Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen 14 (1973): 7–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Frederick Francis. “The Bavarian Army, 1870–1918: The Constitutional and Structural Relations with the Prussian Military Establishment.” PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, Gordon A. The Politics of the Prussian Army, 1640–1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, Joachim. “Das württembergische Offizierkorps 1866–1918.” In Das deutsche Offizierkorps 1860–1960, edited by Hanns Hubert Hofmann, 99–138. Boppard am Rhein: Harald Boldt, 1980.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, Ernst Rudolf. Heer und Staat in der deutschen Geschichte. 2nd ed. Hamburg: Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt, 1943.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, Ernst Rudolf, ed. Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte. 5 vols. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1978–1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jany, Curt. Geschichte der Preußischen Armee vom 15. Jahrhundert bis 1914. 4 vols. 2nd ed. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessel, Eberhard. “Die Entlassung von Kameke und Stosch im Jahre 1883. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen militärischen Institutionen.” In Forschungen zu Staat und Verfassung. Festgabe für Fritz Hartung, edited by Richard Dietrich and Gerhard Oestreich, 441–58. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Körner, Hans-Michael. “‘Na warte Wittelsbach!’ Kaiser Wilhelm II. und das Königreich Bayern.” In Der letzte Kaiser. Wilhelm II. im Exil, edited by Hans Wilderotter and Klaus-Dieter Pohl, 31–42. Berlin: Bertelsmann Lexikon, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matuschka, Edgar Graf von. “Organisationsgeschichte des Heeres 1890 bis 1918.” In Handbuch zur deutschen Militärgeschichte 1648–1939. Vol. 5, Von der Entlassung Bismarcks bis zum Ende des Ersten Weltkrieges (1890–1918), edited by Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt, 157–282. Frankfurt am Main: Bernard & Graefe Verlag für Wehrwesen, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meisner, Heinrich Otto, ed. Denkwürdigkeiten des General-Feldmarschalls Alfred Grafen von Waldersee. 3 vols. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1922–1923.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meisner, Heinrich Otto, ed. Kaiser Friedrich III. Das Kriegstagebuch von 1870/71. Berlin: K.F. Koehler, 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möckl, Karl. Die Prinzregentenzeit. Gesellschaft und Politik während der Ära des Prinzregenten Luitpold in Bayern. Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Frank Lorenz. Our Fritz: Emperor Frederick III and the Political Culture of Imperial Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Frank Lorenz. Royal Heirs in Imperial Germany: The Future of Monarchy in Nineteenth-Century Bavaria, Saxony and Württemberg. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Karl Alexander von, ed. Fürst Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst. Denkwürdigkeiten der Reichskanzlerzeit. Osnabrück: Biblio, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philippi, Hans. Das Königreich Württemberg im Spiegel der preußischen Gesandtschaftsberichte 1871–1914. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rich, Norman, and M.H. Fisher, eds. The Holstein Papers: The Memoirs, Diaries and Correspondence of Friedrich von Holstein, 1837–1909. 4 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955–1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, Gerhard. Staatskunst und Kriegshandwerk. Das Problem des “Militarismus” in Deutschland. 4 vols. Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1954–1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röhl, John C.G. Germany without Bismarck: The Crisis of Government in the Second Reich, 1890–1900. London: B.T. Batsford, 1967.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Röhl, John C.G., ed. Philipp Eulenburgs Politische Korrespondenz. 3 vols. Boppard am Rhein: Harald Boldt, 1976–1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röhl, John C.G. Wilhelm II: The Kaiser’s Personal Monarchy, 1888–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rüddenklau, Harald. “Studien zur Bayerischen Militärpolitik 1871 bis 1914.” PhD diss., Universität Regensburg, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, Paul. Württembergs letzter König. Das Leben Wilhelms II. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, Paul. Württemberg im Kaiserreich. Bürgerliches Freiheitsstreben und monarchischer Obrigkeitsstaat. Tübingen: Silberburg, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Robert Thomas. “Prusso-Württembergian Military Relations in the German Empire, 1870–1918.” PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, Günter. Stellenbesetzung der deutschen Heere 1815–1939. 4 vols. Osnabrück: Biblio, 1990–1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehler, Hans-Ulrich. Das Deutsche Kaiserreich 1871–1918. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedner, Hartmut. “Soldatenmißhandlungen im Wilhelminischen Kaiserreich (1890–1914).” Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 22 (1982): 159–99.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Gavin Wiens

Authors
  1. Gavin Wiens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wiens, G. (2023). The Need for Compromise. In: The Imperial German Army Between Kaiser and King. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22863-6_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22863-6_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-22862-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-22863-6

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation