What do you want to know about German history?

[Freodin]

Have you sworn a secret oath to the supreme chancellor?

No, it is just that not tow weeks ago, I had a (live) discussion with an american friend where we came to this question - and we found that not even the terms "socialist", "conservative" or "liberal" had a corresponding definition in american and german/european culture.

But I´ll try.

Disclaimer: this is a personal opinion, and by no means backed up by sociopolitical studies. It also contains a lot of generalization.

The european history is marked from the beginning by the dominance of government - for good or bad. Thus it is part of the common European mindset: government plays a major role in human society. Government is meant to govern.
So when the source of power was shifted from the government of a few, to the government of the masses, the basic european concept of government became: "We have the power, and we set a government that should fulfill our wishes." Happiness for all by regulating the system. That is, more or less, socialism.

The american culture is based on individualism. It´s "the American dream" that everyone can build their own fortune - and it is their responsibility to achieve it, or fail. Government is an organization that is necessary to keep others from interfering with this personal strive for happiness.

If you chose to maintain not to answer the question, then answer me this: How did German's deal with inflation after both Worldwars? How did they offset the large deficit? Marshall Plan? I have heard rumors that after the wars, people began to use the paper currency as kindling because the markets became so inflated.

After WW1 and WW2 were completely different situations.
Post WW1 had a Germany deeply in debts, huge demands by the victorious allies, and a global economical crisis on top. The inflation in 1923 run rampant because there wasn´t anything to back up the huge amounts of money that were printed to fullfill the demands. Only after the global situation had calmed a little was is possible to cut the losses. A very drastical currency reform was induced, which ruined most of the people who had savings. That was the event that set most of the middle class against the Weimarian republic.

And yes, the inflated currency was used as kindling or as toys for children (I have seen a cute picture of a little child sitting in a castly build from stacks of paper-money). Inflation was so fast that people had to run from receiving their pay to buying goods. Bills were stamped over with new values, because printing would not be fast enough.

Post WW2 was a completely different situation. Global economy was stable, and the (western) allies were set on rebuilding Germany, instead of plundering it. Demand was high, for goods as well as for workers.

 

[Freodin]

As there have been questions about German history, I decided to bump this thread.

Any questions are welcome. Ask away!

 

[USincognito]

How exactly does one differentiate between, say, a "Germanic" person, which could be an ethnicity (like white Anglo American) or a language (like an Austrain or Dane) with a "German" person, who some Pommeranians or Prussians would have problems with.

Forget everything from around 1890-1945 and please reply to the gestalt* issue of Germanic vs. German.

* Oh, and while I'm at it, how do German speaking peoples feel about almost 40% of the English language being coopted, and some works like gastalt and weltanschauung being taken directly as is?

 

[Freodin]

How exactly does one differentiate between, say, a "Germanic" person, which could be an ethnicity (like white Anglo American) or a language (like an Austrain or Dane) with a "German" person, who some Pommeranians or Prussians would have problems with.

Forget everything from around 1890-1945 and please reply to the gestalt* issue of Germanic vs. German.

This is a kind of language problem. In German itself, it is very easy to distinguish between "germanic" and "german". "Germanic" is everything referring to either the old germans, or the linguistic group of germanic languages. The adjective in German would be "germanisch", the noun "Germanen".
The Germans itself, as a people, country or language, do not refer to themselves as "Germans" - we are "Deutsche", talk "Deutsch" and live in "Deutschland".

Now what it is that makes us "German/Deutsch" is something I never figured out - especially in regard to the nationalistic sound-bites of the Neo-Nazis. In my view "Deutsch" is everyone who wants to be, and uses German as his primary language. After three generations at most, no one will bother to ask where his ancestors came from anymore. Perhaps this will get more difficult with the "more foreign" people - non-caucasians - but it worked quite well before, with the Hugenotes and the Ruhr-Poles as the prime examples.

* Oh, and while I'm at it, how do German speaking peoples feel about almost 40% of the English language being coopted, and some works like gastalt and weltanschauung being taken directly as is?

They don´t care at all. They are more concerned about the prevalence of English in the modern German language.

 

[USincognito]

So Deutsch has replaced Volk? That's good to know.

They don´t care at all. They are more concerned about the prevalence of English in the modern German language.

Says the German who speaks better English than I do.

One true History question that I heard on TV a few years ago - and one I could Google myself, but I'd prefer an actual German to respond to...

Who has been stationed on the Rhine longer - the Roman Leigons or the U.S. military?

 

[Freodin]

So Deutsch has replaced Volk? That's good to know.

Volk is still the word for "the people". As that, it has no national connotation - the American people would be "das amerikanische Volk".
Almost no-one today knows that the origin of our name was meant as an insult: "thiusc" was the way the common people, the lower classes spoke - in contrast to the latin speaking nobles.

One true History question that I heard on TV a few years ago - and one I could Google myself, but I'd prefer an actual German to respond to...

Who has been stationed on the Rhine longer - the Roman Leigons or the U.S. military?

The Romans, definitly. Just one example: the city of Cologne (german: Köln) was (partially) founded as the roman military colony (thus its name) of Colonia Claudia Ara Aggripinensium. That was in 50 AD. The city was the last roman fortress on the Rhine. It became frankish in 454 AD.
For the U.S. troops, that would mean they had to stay till 2350 to top that.

 

[SH89]

Is it true that BMW(the car company) was the company that produced airplane engines in Germany during world war 2? Then after the war, were they forced to stop?

Is the BMW logo a propeller?

 

[Freodin]

Is it true that BMW(the car company) was the company that produced airplane engines in Germany during world war 2? Then after the war, were they forced to stop?

Is the BMW logo a propeller?

Yes, that is true. BMW is the "Bayerische MotorenWerke" - the Bavarian Engine Fabrication. They started as producers of engines for planes in 1916 - that is where the logo comes from. After the war (WW1), they turned to motorbikes and later to cars. They still produced engines for other vehicles, planes, boats and trucks, and their engines where used in the fighting planes of WW2.

After this war, every production of war material ceased by necessity. I don´t know if they were "forced" - but whom would they have sold high-power piston engines to?

 

[USincognito]

Volk is still the word for "the people". As that, it has no national connotation - the American people would be "das amerikanische Volk".

Speaking of which, I has almost 350 km under my Volksmarching belt when my family moved back to the states. Odd how simple memories of walking down farm roads can bring back such wonderful memories.

Almost no-one today knows that the origin of our name was meant as an insult: "thiusc" was the way the common people, the lower classes spoke - in contrast to the latin speaking nobles.

Ah! So Germans are vulgar*

I never knew that was the etymological origin of Deutsch. Is that from old Germanic or a Latin root? With the "th" I assume it's German. As an aside, for lurkers, the word "dollar" comes from the German "Thaler" which refers to silver coins minted in an Austrian valley or "thal" hence "Thaler."

* I'm sure most of you will get this, but vulgar just means speaking local language and not Latin.

The Romans, definitly. Just one example: the city of Cologne (german: Köln) was (partially) founded as the roman military colony (thus its name) of Colonia Claudia Ara Aggripinensium. That was in 50 AD. The city was the last roman fortress on the Rhine. It became frankish in 454 AD.
For the U.S. troops, that would mean they had to stay till 2350 to top that.

That's what I thought. I suppose if we really want to define things broadly into it, the Romansch speaking people in Schwietz...er Switzerland, are descendants of the Legions, so Rome really has abutted Germany for two millenia. I've visited Cologne by the way (no umlaut so can't spell it correctly) and the cathedral was magnificent.

 

[USincognito]

Yes, that is true. BMW is the "Bayerische MotorenWerke" - the Bavarian Engine Fabrication.

One of the wonderful things about how *******ized English is, is the fact that many phrases can be directly translated. Motor is synonymous with engine and works is similarly so with factory or fabrication plant.

I can't say the same for "hospital" and "krankenhaus" though.

They started as producers of engines for planes in 1916 - that is where the logo comes from. After the war (WW1), they turned to motorbikes and later to cars. They still produced engines for other vehicles, planes, boats and trucks, and their engines where used in the fighting planes of WW2.

After this war, every production of war material ceased by necessity. I don´t know if they were "forced" - but whom would they have sold high-power piston engines to?

Some years ago I read an editorial in Newsweek decrying the purchase of Rolls Royce (*British History triva - why, in her our of need was it Merlin, not King Arthur who saved England?) by BMW since Messerschmitt had used BMW engines in the Me-109. It turned out that wasn't the case.

Messerschmitt was previous to the war named the Bayrische Flugswerke and that might have led to the confusion with BMW. Also the Me-109 used a Daimler-Benz engine, not a BMW.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Messerschmitt-Bf-109

*Because the Spitfire and the P-51 were powered by Rolls Royce "Merlin" engines.

Well, since this is Freodin's thread - SH89, how about asking him where President Eisenhower got his inspiration for the Interstate highway system?

 

[SH89]

where did President Eisenhower get his inspiration for the Interstate highway system?

 

[Freodin]

where did President Eisenhower get his inspiration for the Interstate highway system?

Hitler´s Autobahn? Well, I don´t know.

The idea of streets exclusively used for cars is not a German invention - it was "in the air" so to speak since motorized transport became popular. In fact, the Italians under Mussolini started to build "Autostradas".

Of course, the importance of good streets to travel on was clear to the military of all times - the Romans build a network of streets that is still, in a lot of areas, the backbone of the European road system. (Modernized of course, but following the same routes!) Napolean build roads for his troops.
Railroads were build not only for comercial transportation, but also for their usability of troop movement.
And so it is obvious that the military in the time of motorized troops was interested in having roads to suit their needs.

I don´t know whether Eisenhower had this military usage in mind... but, hey, that´s American History! You tell me!

 

[wildthing]

The american Inner state high system were designed for military movement.

 

[USincognito]

I don´t know whether Eisenhower had this military usage in mind... but, hey, that´s American History! You tell me!

I don't want to hijack your thread, but as I have read, Eisenhower was impressed by the ability of the Autobahns to move large amounts of motorized men and equipment quickly and came up with the Interstates to replece the "Route" system, or series of U.S. Highways that were full of stop signs and traffic lights in every little town and village - much less the major cities.

Our Interstate system was designed with military mobilization in mind, not what they eventually came to represent - unfettered automotive freedom in this vast and geographically disperate country. Some, myself included, might call them our first "peace dividend."

Anyway, back to Germany... I know the answer, but the readers might find this interesting - who was Hermann, as in the namesake of our "Sons of Hermann" organizations?

 

[koninkaulus]

Hallo!

Germany has always been one of my favorite countries: amazing composers, philosophers, intriguing history and so forth. Infact I zig-zagged all across Deutchland, not this summer but previous.Especially loved Bavaria: beautiful scenery, amazing castles (Neuschwanstein), München's beer halls, friendly people, et cetera et cetera. I even occasionally watch Der Alte and Ein Fall für zwei.


Germany and Finland have always had close ties, even if there have been up and downs. It was even a close call that Finland didn't get a German King (Väinö I), fortunately that didn't happen.


Oh, questions...hm.



I read book (Peter Englund's) about Thirty years' war couple of years ago, but it mostly focused on Swedish perspective of the war. Could you give a quick overview (reasons for war, major players and their motives, consequences of the war).

Your thoughts on supposedly mad Ludwig II of Bavaria. Our tour guide gave the version, that he was misunderstood, Wagner loving, shy, possibly asexual, and he was committed to asulym and perhaps even murdered by his enemies.


I know you didn't want questions about WWII, but what did (then and now, if anything) Germans think about Finland's role in the war (the Finnisches Freiwilligen Bataillon, refusal to allow anti-Semitic practices in Finland, refusal/failure to cut the Murmansk Railroad or to attack Leningrad, the Laplands War).

Those should keep you busy for a while.

 

[Freodin]

I don't want to hijack your thread, but as I have read, Eisenhower was impressed by the ability of the Autobahns to move large amounts of motorized men and equipment quickly and came up with the Interstates to replece the "Route" system, or series of U.S. Highways that were full of stop signs and traffic lights in every little town and village - much less the major cities.

Our Interstate system was designed with military mobilization in mind, not what they eventually came to represent - unfettered automotive freedom in this vast and geographically disperate country. Some, myself included, might call them our first "peace dividend."

I didn´t know that. See, you learn something new any day. Perhaps a little ironic: the Autobahn in "militaristic" Germany was introduced for purely comercial reasons - only in the aftermath the military value was realized and thus dominated the later projects.

Anyway, back to Germany... I know the answer, but the readers might find this interesting - who was Hermann, as in the namesake of our "Sons of Hermann" organizations?

See post #40.
As an addition: at Hermann´s time, there was no "Germany". Hermann was not a "German/Deutscher". He didn´t fight for "Kaiser, Volk und Vaterland" against the evil foreign oppressors.
It was only in the nationalistic wake of the late 19th century that his rebellion against the romans was styled a "national endeavour".

 

[wildthing]

The Thrity Year War was the last and the most destructive of the Religious wars. For a long time religious group were pitted against eact other Catholics aganist Protestants and Calvinist aganist Lutherans. What made the Thrity years war so bad was the entrenchee dhatered of the various sides and their seeming determination to sacrifice all for their religous beliefs and tye extension of political power. This War would have a effect over all of Europe.

Conditions before the War.

Germany in the second half ot the 16th century was an ungovernable land of about 360 autonomous political entites. There were independent secular principalities (duchies,landgriavies and marches); ecclesitical principalities (archbishishoprics, bishoprics and abbeys); numerous free cities; and castle regions dominated by knights. The Peace of Augsburg (1555) had given each a significant degree of soverignty within its own borders. Each could levy its own tolls and tariffs and coined its own money. These practices made travel just about impossible.

Because of germany's central location. It had become Europe highway for merchants and traders going north. Europe's rulers pressed in on Germany. some rulers held lands or legal privilges within certian German principalities. German princes had also looked to import and export markets beyond their bordwe and opposed any efferts to consolidate the Holy Roman Empire, lest their terrorial rights, confirmed by the Peace of Augsburg br taken away. These german prince had no problems to ask Catholic france or the kings of Denmark and Sweden for help against the Habsburg emperor.

Protestants felt that there was a conspiracy to recreate the Catholic Europe of Prereformation times.

Religious Division

Religious conflict accentuated the international and political divisons. During this time the population within the Holy Roman Empire was roughly egually divided between Catholics and Protestants, the latter having a slight numerical edge by 1600. The terms of the Peace of Augsburg had attempted to freeze the territorial holdings of Lutherans and the Catholics. But during a number of years the Lutherans had gained and kept pooitical control in some Catholic areas, as had the Catholics in a few previously Lutheran areas. Territorial reversal, or the threat of them only increasd the suspicion and antipathy between the two sides,

 

[Freodin]

Hallo!

Germany has always been one of my favorite countries: amazing composers, philosophers, intriguing history and so forth. Infact I zig-zagged all across Deutchland, not this summer but previous.Especially loved Bavaria: beautiful scenery, amazing castles (Neuschwanstein), München's beer halls, friendly people, et cetera et cetera. I even occasionally watch Der Alte and Ein Fall für zwei.


Germany and Finland have always had close ties, even if there have been up and downs. It was even a close call that Finland didn't get a German King (Väinö I), fortunately that didn't happen.


Oh, questions...hm.



I read book (Peter Englund's) about Thirty years' war couple of years ago, but it mostly focused on Swedish perspective of the war. Could you give a quick overview (reasons for war, major players and their motives, consequences of the war).

Your thoughts on supposedly mad Ludwig II of Bavaria. Our tour guide gave the version, that he was misunderstood, Wagner loving, shy, possibly asexual, and he was committed to asulym and perhaps even murdered by his enemies.


I know you didn't want questions about WWII, but what did (then and now, if anything) Germans think about Finland's role in the war (the Finnisches Freiwilligen Bataillon, refusal to allow anti-Semitic practices in Finland, refusal/failure to cut the Murmansk Railroad or to attack Leningrad, the Laplands War).

Those should keep you busy for a while.

You are right, this will take me some time.

Let me start with the shortest part: the german view on the finnish part of WW2.

I don´t know anything about that question, and I do not have any sources dealing with this topic. Sorry.

Ludwig II is a topic where I have a little more knowledge about. Whether he was mad is debatable - he brother and successor Otto was mad - no doubt about that.
Ludwig might not have been insane in todays meaning, but his nature made him unsuitable for ruling a country. Perhaps he would have risen to fame as a maezenas of the arts and architecture, or as an artist, poet or musician himself - had he not been king of a fairly important european country in a troublesome time. To declare him "mad" was one of the view ways to remove him from his position of utmost influence.
Theories about his death there are many, and lots of them deal with conspiracies and murder. None of them have been able to provide any evidence. The case has been researched again and again, and the most likely explanation is still: suicide.

I´ll post something on the 30-years-war later.

 

[VikingGirlTBird]

... beyond the well known and discussed Nazi era?

Ask away, and I will try to provide an answer.

Guten Tag Freodin!

How are you?

Can you please tell me about the daily life in Ancient Germanic Tribal Germany, in Medieval Germany, and in Germany during the Renaissance please? Thanks so much! Peace!

Auf Wiedersehen!

 

[MoneyGuy]

Never a first or second reich? That's not what my history studies say. The first was the Holy Roman Empire and the second, I believe, was launched by Bismarck. Maybe it's just terminology.