HM Queen Elizabeth II​ - Rest In Peace
The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 10-23-2011, 12:48 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Hitler, the Hohenzollerns and WWII

What did the German people think of the German Royal Family during WWII?

Hello,

I'm trying to find out what the general attitude among the German people was to the German Royal Family between the wars, and especially during the Second World War?
I know that Kaiser Wilhelm was forced to retire, and went into exile in Holland; however, I have also read that many placed the blame for the loss of the First World War on the "November Criminals" -- politicians, Jews, etc.

So what did the German people think of the Kaiser and his descendants? Were they patriotic, indifferent, or hostile towards them?

All responses are appreciated. Thanks very much for your time! :)
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-24-2011, 02:46 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 591
I think you need to read Royals and teh Reich by Jonathon Petropolis
http://www.amazon.com/Royals-Reich-P.../dp/0195161335
While it is about the support that many german royals gave Nazism, it does give some good insights into how the various german royals were regarded by the general population before and during the war.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-31-2013, 10:57 AM
dsalerno5's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6
Hitler and the Hohenzollern family

I read somewhere that had the allies not gotten rid of the Prussian and Hohenzollern monarchies after world war 1, hitler would never have been able to rise to power. Anyone have any thoughts/insights into this topic?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2014, 12:48 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 7
I suspect dsalerno5 is right... President Wilson, while admirable in his desire to make the world safe for democracy, as delineated in his Fourteen Points, was ultimately proved naive. He was double crossed by his colony-hungry allies in Britain and France and by his own Congress. The Allies refused to negotiate with the Kaiser and insisted upon self determination among the peoples of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was fracturing anyhow. With both of those emperors gone, a huge power vacuum was created, into which Hitler was able to waltz with relative ease, being democratically elected. The German people were not prepared to live in a democratic republic. That had never been their tradition. An example of that is Russia today under Putin... he has steadily chipped away at Russian "democracy" because that is a system the Russian people are unfamiliar with. Thus, they are devolving back into a popular and familiar authoritarianism. I think the Allies learned their lesson after World War I when at the end of World War II, the Japanese were allowed to retain their monarchy, albeit as a mere ceremonial institution. They realized the power of the symbolism of the Imperial Institution. The retention of the monarchy in Japan I think had a calming effect on the post war reconstruction and democratization; that and having MacArthur as an American "Shogun" guiding them along. A modern example of how a monarchy has smoothed a transition from dictatorship to democracy is Spain under King Juan Carlos. In 1918, had the Allies permitted the Germans and the Austrians to retain their monarchies, the history of the 20th century may have been very, very different.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:51 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,309
I think you'd need to go back to pre WWI and forward to get a good feel for the relationship between the people and the German royalty.

I have a friend who's area of specialty is WWII ...will have to ask him what he thinks about this. Interesting question.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-02-2014, 07:48 AM
MarcosFenn's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Pickering, Canada
Posts: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I think you'd need to go back to pre WWI and forward to get a good feel for the relationship between the people and the German royalty.

I have a friend who's area of specialty is WWII ...will have to ask him what he thinks about this. Interesting question.


LaRae
Another aspect is that, while Germany lost its Imperial House in 1918, the House had reigned only since 1871 over the whole of Germany; previously — and in many cases for centuries also — each area of Germany had its own local ruling dynasty.

Local loyalties thus ran deep in Germany; and since 1648 (Treaty of Westphalia) local rulers defined their subjects' religion according to the principle: cuius regio, eius religio.

So having had one reigning dynasty over the whole of Germany was merely one, rather short-lived, aspect of various, deep-seated loyalties in various parts of Germany, with religion an important part of this.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-02-2014, 05:58 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,309
Yes you can go back to the capture of Richard the Lionheart and see how that multiple rulers played out as an example of what you mention. The Germans of the early 20th century barely had time to get to know the ruling family of a united Germany.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-02-2014, 07:02 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by orrinhoover View Post
I suspect dsalerno5 is right... President Wilson, while admirable in his desire to make the world safe for democracy, as delineated in his Fourteen Points, was ultimately proved naive. He was double crossed by his colony-hungry allies in Britain and France and by his own Congress. The Allies refused to negotiate with the Kaiser and insisted upon self determination among the peoples of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was fracturing anyhow. With both of those emperors gone, a huge power vacuum was created, into which Hitler was able to waltz with relative ease, being democratically elected. The German people were not prepared to live in a democratic republic. That had never been their tradition. An example of that is Russia today under Putin... he has steadily chipped away at Russian "democracy" because that is a system the Russian people are unfamiliar with. Thus, they are devolving back into a popular and familiar authoritarianism. I think the Allies learned their lesson after World War I when at the end of World War II, the Japanese were allowed to retain their monarchy, albeit as a mere ceremonial institution. They realized the power of the symbolism of the Imperial Institution. The retention of the monarchy in Japan I think had a calming effect on the post war reconstruction and democratization; that and having MacArthur as an American "Shogun" guiding them along. A modern example of how a monarchy has smoothed a transition from dictatorship to democracy is Spain under King Juan Carlos. In 1918, had the Allies permitted the Germans and the Austrians to retain their monarchies, the history of the 20th century may have been very, very different.
Excellent, excellent post, thank you. Very sobering to think about the flip side of Woodrow Wilson's misguided(perhaps) idealism.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-02-2014, 09:27 PM
MarcosFenn's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Pickering, Canada
Posts: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Excellent, excellent post, thank you. Very sobering to think about the flip side of Woodrow Wilson's misguided(perhaps) idealism.
Interestingly, states such as Lithuania, which emerged as independent states at the end of World War One, became republics, although in the case of Lithuania, under the German Empire, Monaco-born King Mindaugas reigned for a few months before the Armistice.

Mindaugas was dispensed with. Poland, which also re-emerged as a state at the end of World War One, and Lithuania then proceeded to start fighting each other.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-03-2014, 08:15 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,309
War, unfortunately, is the nature of man. It seems we learn little from the past.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-17-2014, 06:24 AM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 24,256
Der Spiegel published a conclusion by historians in September, which said that Crown Prince Wilhelm promoted the coming to power of Hitler. The historians were hired by the state of Brandenburg to research the complaint of the Hohenzollerns against the state. In 1991 they started a law suit for the return of their properties. The conclusion is said to weaken their claim.

Prinz mit Schuss. Verhalf Kronprinz Wilhelm 1933 Hitler an die Macht? Von der Antwort hängt eine Millionenentschädigung an die Hohenzollern ab | pressespiegel.

http://www.rbb-online.de/politik/bei...014/09/Medienb
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-17-2014, 05:51 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by orrinhoover View Post
I suspect dsalerno5 is right... President Wilson, while admirable in his desire to make the world safe for democracy, as delineated in his Fourteen Points, was ultimately proved naive. He was double crossed by his colony-hungry allies in Britain and France and by his own Congress. The Allies refused to negotiate with the Kaiser and insisted upon self determination among the peoples of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was fracturing anyhow. With both of those emperors gone, a huge power vacuum was created, into which Hitler was able to waltz with relative ease, being democratically elected. The German people were not prepared to live in a democratic republic. That had never been their tradition. An example of that is Russia today under Putin... he has steadily chipped away at Russian "democracy" because that is a system the Russian people are unfamiliar with. Thus, they are devolving back into a popular and familiar authoritarianism. I think the Allies learned their lesson after World War I when at the end of World War II, the Japanese were allowed to retain their monarchy, albeit as a mere ceremonial institution. They realized the power of the symbolism of the Imperial Institution. The retention of the monarchy in Japan I think had a calming effect on the post war reconstruction and democratization; that and having MacArthur as an American "Shogun" guiding them along. A modern example of how a monarchy has smoothed a transition from dictatorship to democracy is Spain under King Juan Carlos. In 1918, had the Allies permitted the Germans and the Austrians to retain their monarchies, the history of the 20th century may have been very, very different.
It was none other than Winston Churchill who argued "If the Allies at the peace table at Versailles had allowed a Hohenzollern, a Wittelsbach and a Habsburg to return to their thrones, there would have been no Hitler. A democratic basis of society might have been preserved by a crowned Weimar in contact with the victorious Allies.” in the aftermath of the Second World War (26th April 1946).

I think it's really hard to decide how much the downfall of the Hapsburgs and Hohenzollerns was due to internal developments before Versailles and how much was the result of the agenda of the victors. In the case of the Hapsburgs, I think a break-up of the Empire was inevitable but a Kingdom of Austria or even Hungary could have been salvaged from the ashes of defeat. Emperor Karl I was potentially a dependable ally for the victorious powers and had he been retained (and had he lived longer), he would have been quite a counterweight to the ambitions of those who wished to achieve union with Germany, I think, enabling Austria to transition to a full democracy.

The funerals of many ex-Monarchs in Germany in the 1920s, most notably those of Ludwig III of Bavaria and Empress Augusta, demonstrate that strong monarchist sentiment remained after the dissolution of the empire, supporting Churchill's argument.

Nonetheless, the Hohenzollerns pose more of a problem in that neither the Kaiser nor the Crown Prince could realistically be looked upon as reliable partners post-1918. Perhaps if the German Empire had been dissolved in favour of a return to a more rationalised form of the pre-1866 status quo, the result would have been a more stable, less threatening Germany with its Kingdoms and Grand Duchies providing a focus for loyalty and the reconstruction of a new identity. However, I doubt if this would have been acceptable to the German people themselves in the age of nationalism and the nation state and who is to say whether a fragmented Germany would have been more easily overrun by the 'communist' juggernaut, a fate that nearly befell Hungary.

I don't think Wilson "got" Europe - and he's not the last US President to have that failing. Advocating universal human rights is a noble cause but it doesn't necessarily follow that the ideal framework for their promotion can be the same in every culture or society. The US and the French pushed for the republican ideal as this corresponded with their image of democracy but, as we know, it's far from being the only one, and it could be argued that many of the surviving monarchies in Europe are more democratic than, say, the French or Italian Republics. Besides, as orrinhoover points out, although three defeated empires fell, the three victorious ones did very nicely out of the war, thank you very much, in terms of acquiring new colonies/mandates and/or greater economic/political influence.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-13-2020, 09:01 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bonn, Germany
Posts: 19
One problem was that the Crown Prince was not popular. Otherwise, it might have been possible to send the Emperor to exile while retaining the monarchy. With an intelligent, liberal Crown Prince, Germany could have put Prince Albert's old dream into practice and turned into a democratic constitutional monarchy.

It's difficult to say in retrospect. The funeral for the old Empress (description in German here: https://www.wissenschaft.de/zeitpunk...-die-kaiserin/ ) shows that there was still an emotional bond and loyalty. By throwing out everything connected with the monarchy, the new republic alienated conservative circles (and Germany was a conservative country then). In the Weimar years, political movements at the extreme fringes of the political map increased, and the conservative-liberal-centrist suffered from a leadership vacuum.

A symbolic figure, a benevolent, liberal monarch a la Great Britain might have prevented the centrifugal tendencies.

It's speculation. Most people associated the change from monarchy to republic with the bitter end of WWI and resented it.

Reading historians like Christopher Clark, the "only Germany was guilty" theory is indeed debatable, and people might have had a point when rejecting it at least in part. The bitterness of Germans then turned toxic.

In retrospect, if I could change one thing in German history, I'd be hesitating between two options: 1. keep Emperor Frederick, father of William II, healthy for 15 more years, or 2. let the Hohenzollerns cooperate with a new republic and remain as heads of state.

Either might have avoided the historical catastrophe that followed in 1933.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-24-2021, 04:30 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 24,256
A new book about Crown Prince Wilhelm and his role during the early years of the Nazi party will be presented on wednesday in Berlin. The book will be presented by Peter Altmaier, minister of Economic Affairs. The speech will is awaited with tension as the family tries to reclaim part of its property, which was confiscated by the communists after the war.

The author is Lothar Machtan. The book has the title "Der Kronprinz und die Nazis. Der blinde Fleck der Hohenzollern" (the crown prince and the Nazis. The blind spot of the Hohenzollerns) and is published by Duncker & Humblot.

https://www.duncker-humblot.de/macht...ie-nazis/c-640

https://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/h...helm-1.5384901

In september another historian - Stephan Malinowski- will rpesent a book about the Hohenzollerns and the Nazis. It is titled "Die Hohenzollern und die Nazis. Geschichte einer Kollaboration" (The Hohenzollerns and the Nazis. History of a collaboration).

The latter book is supposed to be more damning than the one that will be presented tomorrow.
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-24-2021, 04:38 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 3,009
So is the timing just coincidental, or is this meant to damage the Hohenzollern case and prevent a reclamation?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-24-2021, 04:44 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 24,256
I would say such books take some years to write, edit and get published and I can't see why these historians would feel the need to harm prince Georg Friedrich's reclamation. But I imagine it is very well possible that the court case raised the interest of publishing houses now the matter is in the press & perhaps can count on more publicity/sales than it normally would?

But perhaps German posters will have a clearer picture of the matter.
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-24-2021, 07:59 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 823
"The Hohenzollerns and the Nazis. History of a collaboration"

Well, one should surely not judge a book by it's cover or title and especially before it gets published... But this title of the Malinowski book sounds a bit harsh!

As if THE Hohenzollerns - all of them? - were Nazi enablers...

So, I'm assuming this Malinowski dude here has an agenda!

Well, we will see!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-24-2021, 11:39 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,839
An article from last year which discusses Hohenzollern claims for restitution and Crown Prince Wilhelm’s relations with Hitler, which apparently included the writing of ‘fawning letters’ to the Nazi leader.

https://berlinpolicyjournal.com/the-...nd-the-prince/

From what I’ve read I believe that the Kaiser’s fourth son Prince August (‘Auwi’) was the most drawn to Nazism of Kaiser Wilhelm’s children. He was used by them until he came a cropper in 1942 when he criticised Goebbels. Auwi was a very conservative character.

The Kaiser’s second wife Hermine is believed to have been sympathetic to the rise of the Nazi Party.

https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/...fuhrer-153062/


However the Kaiser himself and the rest of his sons and his daughter weren’t supporters. Kaiser Wilhelm was privately a constant critic of the regime, in fact.

Of course the family, like many noble and royal families in Germany, no doubt hoped in the early days of Nazism that the Party might support a return to the throne of Hohenzollerns and other royals.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-06-2022, 01:21 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marengo View Post
I would say such books take some years to write, edit and get published and I can't see why these historians would feel the need to harm prince Georg Friedrich's reclamation. But I imagine it is very well possible that the court case raised the interest of publishing houses now the matter is in the press & perhaps can count on more publicity/sales than it normally would?

But perhaps German posters will have a clearer picture of the matter.
Believe you me a number of these historians want to discredit Georg Friedrich’s claims and the powerful political group in Brandenburg is controlled by the SPD (Leftists) and they certainly are not interested in giving the Hohenzollerns anything.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
german royal family, germany, hohenzollern, kaiser, second world war


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
#uae #abudhabirullingfamily 18th birthday abdullah ii africa albert prince consort arcadie arcadie claret austria braganza british royal family brythonic assoc. non-reigning houses +- camilla caribbean castile charles charles iii claret congo current events danish royal family death de la cerda duarte pio dubai expo duchess of kent duke of cambridge elizabeth ii genealogy general news guzman hamdan bin ahmed history identifying india ingrid-alexandra introduction ivrea jordan royal family king charles king edward iii king henry iii king philippe king willem-alexander louis mountbatten maria ii matrilineal monarchy mountbatten need help noble families norway crown princely couple official visit order of precedence orleans-braganza pedro ii prince charles prince of wales prince of wales in jordan princess of orange queen camilla queen elizabeth queen margrethe ii queen mathilde queen maxima queen victoria restoration state visit tokugawa visit wine glass


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:16 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022
Jelsoft Enterprises
×