134. Gerhard Ritter, Arbeiter im Deutschen Kaiserreich, 1871 bis 1914 (Bonn, 1992), esp. p. 383; J. Frerich and M. Frey, Handbuch der Geschichte der Sozialpolitik in Deutschland, vol. 1, Von der vorindustriellen Zeit bis zum Ende des Dritten Reiches (3 vols., Munich, 1993), pp. 130–32, 141–2.
135. Andreas Kunz, ‘The State as Employer in Germany, 1880–1918: From Paternalism to Public Policy’, in W. Robert Lee and Eve Rosenhaft (eds.), State, Society and Social Change in Germany, 1880–1914 (Oxford, 1990), pp. 37–63, here pp. 40–41.
17 Endings
1. Harry Count Kessler, Diary entry, Magdeburg, 7 November 1918, in id., Tagebücher 1918–1937, ed. Wolfgang Pfeiffer-Belli (Frankfurt/Main, 1961), p. 18.
2. Ibid., p. 24.
3. Jürgen Kloosterhuis (ed.), Preussisch Dienen und Geniessen. Die Lebenszeiterzählung des Ministerialrats Dr Herbert du Mesnil (1857–1947) (Cologne, 1998), p. 350.
4. Bocholter Volksblatt, 14 November 1918, cited in Hugo Stehkamper, ‘Westfalen und die Rheinisch-Westfälische Republik 1918/19. Zenturmsdiskussionen über einen bundesstaatlichen Zusammenschluss der beiden preussischen Westprovinzen’, in Karl Dietrich Bracher, Paul Mikat, Konrad Repgen, Martin Schumacher and Hans-Peter Schwarz (eds.), Staat und Parteien. Festschrift für Rudolf Morsey (Berlin, 1992), pp. 579–634.
5. Edgar Hartwig, ‘Welfen, 1866–1933’, in Dieter Fricke (ed.), Lexikon zur Parteiengeschichte (4 vols., Leipzig, Cologne, 1983–6), vol. 4, pp. 487–9.
6. Peter Lesńiewski, ‘Three Insurrections: Upper Silesia 1919–21’, in Peter Stachura (ed.), Poland between the Wars, 1918–1939 (Houndsmills, 1998), pp. 13–42.
7. Prussia lost about 16 per cent of its surface area as a consequence of the territorial adjustments that followed the defeat of 1918. These encompassed the Memel area (Lithuania), the land removed from West Prussia to form the Free City of Danzig, the bulk of the old provinces of West Prussia and Posen, as well as small sections of Pomerania and East Prussia (to Poland), North Schleswig with the islands of Alsen and Röm (to Denmark), Eupen and Malmédy (to Belgium), a part of the Saar region (placed under international administration, with coal mines under French control), the Hultschin district of Upper Silesia (to Czechoslovakia) and parts of Upper Silesia (to Poland, following local plebiscites). In all, Prussia’s territorial losses amounted to 56, 058 square kilometres; the total on 1 November 1918 was 348, 780 square kilometres.
8. Cited in Horst Möller, ‘Preussen von 1918 bis 1947: Weimarer Republik, Preussen und der Nationalsozialismus’, in Wolfgang Neugebauer (ed.), Handbuch der preussischen Geschichte, vol. 3, Vom Kaiserreich zum 20. Jahrhundert und Grosse Themen der Geschichte Preussens (Berlin, 2001), pp. 149–301, here p. 193.
9. Gisbert Knopp, Die preussische Verwaltung des Regierungsbezirks Düsseldorf in den Jahren 1899–1919 (Cologne, 1974), p. 344.
10.Möller, ‘Preussen’, pp. 177–9; Henry Friedlander, The German Revolution of 1918 (New York, 1992), pp. 242, 244.
11. Heinrich August Winkler, Weimar 1918–1933. Die Geschichte der ersten deutschen Demokratie (Munich, 1993), p. 66.
12. Hagen Schulze, ‘Democratic Prussia in Weimar Germany, 1919–33’, in Dwyer (ed.), Modern Prussian History, pp. 211–29, here p. 213.
13. Gerald D. Feldman, The Great Disorder. Politics, Economics and Society in the German Inflation 1914–1924 (Oxford, 1997), pp. 134, 161.
14. In a classic study of German civil–military relations after the First World War, John Wheeler Bennett argued that the Ebert–Groener pact sealed the fate of the Weimar Republic; most other historians have taken a more moderate view. See John Wheeler Bennett, The Nemesis of Power. The German Army and Politics 1918–1945 (London, 1953), p. 21; cf. Craig, Prussian Army, p. 348; Wehler, Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte, vol. 4, Vom Beginn des Ersten Weltkriegs bis zur Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten (Munich, 2003), pp. 69–72.
15. Craig, Politics of the Prussian Army, p. 351.
16. The cabinet, or Council of People’s Representatives, refers to the new SPD/USPD government that succeeded the old Prussian-German executive. The Executive Council, elected on 10 November, represented the diffuse interests gathered in the Soldiers’ and Workers’ Councils movement in Berlin. The relationship between the two bodies was a matter of contention during the early months of the republic.
17. This speech was reprinted in Die Freiheit (Berlin), 16 and 17 December 1918. The text may also be consulted at http://www.marxists.org/deutsch/archiv/luxemburg/1918/12/uspdgb.htm; last accessed 26 October 2004.
18.Möller, ‘Preussen’, pp. 188–9.
19. Susanne Miller, Die Bürde der Macht. Die deutsche Sozialdemokratie 1918–1920 (Düsseldorf, 1979), p. 226.
20. Hagen Schulze, Weimar. Deutschland 1917–1933 (Berlin, 1982), p. 180.
21. Diary entries of 7 January and 6 January in Kessler, Tagebücher, pp. 97, 95.
22. Annemarie Lange, Berlin in der Weimarer Republik (Berlin/GDR, 1987), pp. 47, 198–9.
23. This image was published in the third edition of Die Pleite (Bankruptcy), a journal produced by the leftist Malik Verlag, later one of the foremost publishing houses for Communist intellectuals in the Weimar Republic.
24. There were further repressions in Halle, Magdeburg, Mühlheim, Düsseldorf, Dresden, Leipzig and Munich. The repressions in Munich, where the Communists actually succeeded briefly in seizing power and proclaiming a ‘Soviet Republic of Bavaria’, were exceptionally brutal.
25. Craig, Prussian Army, p. 388.
26. Hans von Seeckt, ‘Heer im Staat’ in id., Gedanken eines Soldaten (Berlin, 1929), pp. 101–16, here p. 115.
27. On the ‘Prussian étatisme’ of the coalition parties, see Dietrich Orlow, Weimar Prussia, 1918–1925. The Unlikely Rock of Democracy (Pittsburgh, 1986), pp. 247, 249; Hagen Schulze, Otto Braun oder Preussens demokratische Sendung (Frankfurt/Main, 1977), pp. 316–23 and passim; Winkler, Weimar, pp. 66–7. On the Catholics, see Möller, ‘Preussen’, p. 237.
28. Cited in Schulze, ‘Democratic Prussia’ in Dwyer (ed), Modern Prussian History, pp. 211–29, here p. 214.
29. Heinrich Hannover and Christine Hannover-Druck, Politische Justiz 1918–1933 (Bornheim-Merten, 1987), pp. 25–7 and passim.
30. Peter Lessmann, Die preussische Schutzpolizei in der Weimarer Republik. Streifendienst und Strassenkampf (Düsseldorf, 1989), p. 82.
31. Ibid., p. 88.
32. Hsi-Huey Liang, The Berlin Police Force in the Weimar Republic (Berkeley, 1970), pp. 73–81; Schulze, ‘Democratic Prussia’, p. 215.
33. Lessmann, Schutzpolizei, pp. 211–14; Christoph Graf, Politische Polizei zwischen Demokratie und Diktatur (Berlin, 1983), pp. 43–8; Eric D. Kohler, ‘The Crisis in the Prussian Schutzpolizei 1930–32’, in George Mosse (ed.), Police Forces in History (London, 1975), pp. 131–50.
34. Henning Grunwald, ‘Political Trial Lawyers in the Weimar Republic’, Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge (2002).
35. Orlow, Weimar Prussia, pp. 16–7. On the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ right, see Hans Christof Kraus, ‘Altkonservativismus und moderne politische Rechte. Zum Problem der Kontinuität rechter politischer Strömungen in Deutschland’, in Thomas Nipperdey et al. (eds.), Weltbürgerkrieg der Ideologien. Antworten an Ernst Nolte (Berlin, 1993), pp. 99–121. On right-wing enthusiasm for the idea of a radical ‘conservative revolution’ that would break the boundaries of the traditional Prussian conservatism, see Jeffrey Herf, Reactionary Modernism. Technology, Culture and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich (Cambridge, 1984), esp. pp. 18–48; Armin Mohler, Die konservative Revolution in Deutschland, 1918–1932 (Darmstadt, 1972); George Mosse, ‘The Corporate State and the Conservative Revolution’ in id., Germans and Jews: the Right, the Left and the Search for a “Third Force” in Pre-Nazi Germany (New York, 1970), pp. 116–43.