Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T13:27:52.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An “Era of Reconciliation” in German-Polish Relations (1890-1894)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Richard Blanke
Richard Blanke*
Affiliation:
University of Maine, Orono, Maine
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

With Bismarck's dismissal as head of the German and Prussian governments in 1890, a number of policies bearing his personal stamp were called into question, including his Polish policy. The chancellorship of General von Caprivi (1890-94) saw a perceptible twist in the long history of relations between the Prussian/German governments and their Polish subjects, causing both contemporaries and historians to speak of an “era of reconciliation” (Versöhnungsära). During this period, Polish leaders supported government legislation and offered to work to strengthen the German Empire, while the Caprivi administration indicated its desire for better relations with the Poles and made a number of concessions to them. The Era of Reconciliation did not last long, however, not even as long as Caprivi's own tenure; its net results were meager, and after 1894 the idea of German-Polish cooperation faded away.

Although this period has attracted the interest of some scholars of German-Polish relations, it has not received (perhaps because of its aberrant character) its fair share of attention in general works on German-Polish relations. Quite fundamental questions—for example, what prompted the milder Polish policies and why did they turn out so disappointingly—remain without adequate answers. In considering these questions, it is important to keep in mind that the Era of Reconciliation was a two-way street: a merger of government policy under Caprivi with a parallel trend toward “loyalism” within the Polish leadership.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 1977 , pp. 39 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1977

References

1. Most recently, Harry Rosenthal, “The Problem of Caprivi's Polish Policy,” European Studies Review, 2 (1972) : 255-64.

2. For the context of this problem, see the numerous general studies of German-Polish relations. Recent works include Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, “Die Polenpolitik im deutschen Kaiserreich, 1871-1918,” in Politische Ideologien und nationalstaatliche Ordnung, Festschrift für Theodor Schieder, ed. K. Kluxen and W. Mommsen (Munich, 1968), pp. 297–316 Google Scholar; Horst, Jablonowski, Die preussische Polenpolitik von 1815 bis 1914 (Würzburg, 1964 Google Scholar); Martin, Broszat, 200 Jahre deutscher Polenpolitik (Munich, 1963)Google Scholar; and Werner, Frauendienst, “Preussischer Staatsbewusstsein und polnischer Nationalismus : Preussisch-deutsche Polenpolitik in Das östliche Deutschland, ed. Gottinger Arbeitskreis (Würzburg, 1959), pp. 305–62Google Scholar. Of the older works, those which retain the most value are Jozef, Buzek, Historia polityki narodowoiciowej rzqdu pruskiego wobec Polakow (Lwow, 1909 Google Scholar); Manfred, Laubert, Die preussische Polenpolitik 1772-1914, 3rd ed. (Cracow, 1944)Google Scholar; and Jozef, Feldman, Bismarck a Polska, 2nd ed. (Cracow, 1947)Google Scholar.

3. For the development of Polish loyalism, see Lech, Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich klas posiadajqcych w Wielkopolsce w erze Capriviego (Posen, 1960)Google Scholar; Alfred, Kucner, “Polityka ‘Kota Polskiego’ w Berlinie w erze Kanclerza Capriviego,” Nauka i Sztuka, 3 (1947) : 42–76Google Scholar; Wilhelm, Feldman, Geschichte der politischen Ideen in Polen seit dessen Teilungen, 1795-1914 (Osnabriick, 1964 [a reprint of the 1917 Munich edition])Google Scholar; Roman, Komierowski, Kolo Polskie w Berlinie, 1875-1900 (Posen, 1905 Google Scholar); Richard, Blanke, “The Development of Loyalism in Prussian Poland,” Slavonic and East European Review, 52 (1974) : 548–65Google Scholar.

4. See Hans, Wendt, Bismarck und die polnische Frage (Halle, 1922)Google Scholar; and Friedrich, Koch, Bismarck iiber die Polen (Berlin, 1913 Google Scholar).

5. H. O., Meisner, “Reichskanzler Caprivi,” Zeitschrift fiir die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 111 (1953) : 739 Google Scholar. The “Caprivi Papers” in the Geheimes Preussisches Staatsarchiv, Berlin-Dahlem (hereafter GPSA Berlin) consist of an .envelope containing a few personal letters and citations; some letters to a friendly professor constitute virtually the sum of published post-1894 statements by Caprivi (see Max, Schneidewin, “Briefe des toten Reichskanzlers von Caprivi,” Deutsche Revue, 47 (1922) : 136–47, 247-58Google Scholar.

6. See Hans, Rothfels, Bismarck, der Osten, und das Reich (Stuttgart, 1960), especially pp. 68-96Google Scholar, and Theodor, Schieder, Das Deutsche Reich von 1871 als Nationalstaat (Cologne, 1961), pp. 22 ffGoogle Scholar.

7. Prussia, Landtag, Haus der Abgeordneten : Stenographische Berichte, Legislative Period 17 : 3, 80th Session (May 2, 1891), p. 2106.

8. Ibid., pp. 2105 f., speech by Jazdzewski.

9. Dziennik Poznański, October 28, 1894.

10. Politisches Archiv des Auswartigen Amtes, Bonn (hereafter PA Bonn), Preussen 4 (Acta betr. polnische Agitationen), Gossler to Caprivi, October 16, 1890.

11. Ibid., Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, October 24, 1890.

12. Ibid., Caprivi marginalia on Gossler memorandum of October 16, 1890.

13. Ibid., Gossler to Caprivi, February 18, 1891.

14. See John Röhl, Germany without Bismarck (Cambridge, 1967), p. 77.

15. Rosenthal, “Caprivi's Polish Policy,” p. 258.

16. Before 1890, Bismarck refused to consider such offers; when Polish loyalist leaders took the accession of Emperor Friedrich in 1888 as the signal to launch their first major loyalist initiative, he directed Interior Minister Puttkamer to draw up a reply “so sharp the Poles will never forget it” (PA Bonn, Preussen 4, Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, May 16, 1888).

17. Bundesarchiv Koblenz (hereafter BA Koblenz), P135 (Acta Generalia des Justiz- Ministeriums), 5964-5 (Zeitungsberichte der Regierungen aus der Provinz Posen), report over Zedlitz's signature, June 19, 1890. (The Justice Ministry documents cited herein as BA Koblenz, P135 recently have been moved to GPSA Berlin.)

18. GPSA Berlin, Rep. 830 : 11 (Regierung zu Bromberg : Abteilung für Kirchen und Schulwesen), 2526 (Forderung des deutschen Schulwesens), Zedlitz decree of April 11, 1891.

19. See Harry Kenneth Rosenthal, “The Election of Archbishop Stablewski,” Slavic Review, 28, no. 2 (1969) : 265-75.

20. GPSA Berlin, Rep. 830 : 11, 2526, Zedlitz to Tiedemann, May 5, 1891.

21. Ibid., Zedlitz order of August 2, 1891.

22. Holstein's papers contain the most complete record of these considerations; see The Holstein Papers, ed. N. Rich and M. Fisher, 4 vols. (Cambridge, 1957).

23. Letter to Yorck, military attache in St. Petersburg, November 17, 1887, “Briefwechsel zwischen Chef des General-Stabes Waldersee und Militar-Attache Yorck von Wartenburg, 1885-1894,” ed. H. 0. Meisner, Historisch-politisches Archiv cur Deutschen Geschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, 1 (1930) : 152.

24. Letter to Yorck, May 18, 1888, ibid., p. 164.

25. Alfred von Waldersee, Denkwürdigkeiten, ed. H. O. Meisner, vol. 1 (Stuttgart, 1925), p. 303.

26. BA Koblenz, P135, 4066-7 (Gesetzgebung und Verwaltung in den Provinzen Posen, Westpreussen, und Oberschlesien), Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, January 24 and February 21, 1886.

27. Bogdan Hutten-Czapski, Sechsig Jahre Politik und Gesellschaft (Berlin, 1936), p. 191.

28. Abgeordnetenhaus, Legislative Period 17 : 4, 23rd Session (March 1, 1892), p. 640, as quoted by Czarlinski.

29. Tirpitz, Alfred von, My Memoirs, vol. 1 (New York, 1919), p. 1919 Google Scholar; see also Rudolf, Stadelmann, “Der Neue Kurs in Deutschland,” Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 4 (1953) : 541 Google Scholar.

30. Tirpitz, My Memoirs, 1 : 40.

31. Komierowski, Kolo Polskie w Berlinie, pp. 216 ff., has the full text of this speech.

32. Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich Has posiadajqcych, p. 80.

33. Hutten-Czapski, Sechsig Jahre, p. 167.

34. Ibid., pp. 172 ff.

35. Emperor Wilhelm, 's Ereignisse und Gestalten (Leipzig, 1922)Google Scholar and Kaiserreden, ed. O. Klaussmann (Leipzig, 1902) contain almost no references to the Polish question during this period.

36. John Rohl, “A Document of 1892 on Germany, Prussia, and Poland,” Historical Journal, 7 (1964) : 143-49.

37. Ibid.; see also Poultney Bigelow, Prussian Memories (New York, 1915), pp. 102 ff.

38. See, for example, Hans Pfeiffer, Der polnische Adel und die preussische Polenpolitik von 1863 bis 1894 (Jena, 1939), p. 64.

39. See J. Alden Nichols, Germany after Bismarck (Cambridge, Mass., 19S8), for the parliamentary history of the Caprivi era.

40. See Kurt Richter, Der Kampf um den Schulgesetzentwurf des Grafen Zedlitz- Triitsschler vom Jahre 1892 (Halle, 1934).

41. Abgeordnetenhaus, Caprivi's speech of May 2, 1891.

42. PA Bonn, Polen I.A.B.g 14 (Stellung des Erzbischofs von Posen und Gnesen als Primas von Polen), Marschall to Caprivi, April 28, 1893. Rumor in the Polish press had it that Wilhelm had actually apologized to Ledochowski for his treatment and forced abdication at Bismarck's hands (Kuryer Posnański, April 29, 1893); see also Nichols, Germany after Bismarck, p. 251.

43. On the struggle between loyalists and antiloyalists in the Polish provinces, see Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich Mas posiadajqcych, pp. 120 ff.; and Rosenthal, Harry Kenneth, “Rivalry between ‘Notables’ and ‘Townspeople’ in Prussian Poland : The First Round,” Slavonic and East European Review, 49 (1971) : 68–79Google Scholar.

44. BA Koblenz, P13S, 4067, Kaltenborn memorandum of March 20, 1893.

45. PA Bonn, Preussen 4, Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, May 16, 1893. Even the army's own later guidelines allowed only 5 percent of a given unit to be Polish, and these men had to be politically reliable and fluent in German (ibid., Cabinet meeting minutes, February 27, 1894).

46. Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich Mas posiadajqcych, p. 69.

47. PA Bonn, Preussen 8 : 2 (Die Unterrichtssprache in den Schulen der Erzdiozese Posen), Caprivi to Bosse, May 24, 1893; Bosse to Caprivi, May 30, 1893.

48. Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich klas posiadajqcych, p. 71.

49. See Wilhelm von Massow, Polennot im deutschen Osten, 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1907), p. 73, who cites a letter made public in 1898 but apparently no longer extant.

50. See Walther Lotz, Die Handelspolitik des deutschen Reiches unter Graf Caprivi und Fiirst Hohenlohe, 1890-1900 (Leipzig, 1901).

51. Biblioteka Kórnicka, Rep. 1454—8 (Protokoty posiedzen Koła Polskiego w sejmie pruskim), Polish Party Caucus minutes, May 24, 1893; and Sarah, Tirrell, German Agrarian Politics after Bismarck's Fall (New York, 1951), p. 1951 Google Scholar. See also Hanne-Lore Land, Die Konservativen und die preussische Polenpolitik, 1886-1912 (West Berlin, 1963); and Puhle, Hans-Jtirgen, Agrarische Interessenpolitik und preussischer Konservatismus im wilhelminischen Reich, 1893-1914 (Hanover, 1966)Google Scholar.

52. BA Koblenz, P135, 4067, Wilamowitz memorandum of September 27, 1893.

53. PA Bonn, Preussen 8 : 2, Bosse to Caprivi, November 14, 1893; officially Bosse relented because he thought the private Polish instruction program was getting out of hand. In ﹛act, this was merely a rationalization, for the Poles would hardly have been so insistent about the return of Polish to the regular curriculum had their private efforts not been having serious problems.

54. Ibid., Caprivi memorandum of November 18, 1893.

55. Ibid., Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, December 18, 1893.

56. BA Koblenz, P135, 4067, Cabinet meeting minutes, February 27, 1894.

57. Abgeordnetenhaus, Legislative Period, 18 : 1, 25th Session (March 1, 1894), pp. 781 f.

58. Ludwig Raschdau, Unter Bismarck und Caprivi (Berlin, 1939), p. 208.

59. BA Koblenz, P135, 4089-90 (Gesetzgebung und Verwaltung in den Provinzen Posen, Westpreussen, und Oberschlesien : Die Ansiedlungskommission), Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, March 23 and April 12, 1891. One reason for Caprivi's action was that Wilamowitz, Zedlitz's successor as governor of Poznania, originally had been an outspoken opponent of the settlement project.

60. Buzek, Historia polityki narodowoiciowej, p. 144.

61. Ludwig, Bernhard, Die Polenjrage, 3rd ed. (Munich and Leipzig, 1920), p. Leipzig Google Scholar. See also Witold, Jakobczyk, “The First Decade of the Settlement Commission's Activities, 1886- 1897,” Polish Review, 17 (1972) : 3–13Google Scholar; Robert, Koehl, “Colonialism inside Germany,” Journal of Modern History, 25 (1953) : 255–72Google Scholar; Zwanzig Jahre deutscher Kulturarbeit, ed. Haus der Abgeordneten (Berlin, 1907); and Leo, Wegener, Der wirtschaftliche Kampf der Deutschen unit den Polen um die Provins Posen (Posen, 1903)Google Scholar.

62. Abgeordnetenhaus, Caprivi's speech of May 2, 1891 : “The state government is unwilling to change the present law.“

63. BA Koblenz, P13S, 4089, Prussian Cabinet meeting minutes, April 12, 1891.

64. Abgeordnetenhaus, Legislative Period 17 : 2, 26th Session (March 12, 1890).

65. Abgeordnetenhaus, Caprivi's speech of May 2, 1891.

66. See Wilhelm Münstermann, Die preussisch-deutsche Polenpolitik der Caprivizeit und die deutsche öffentliche Meinung (Miinster, 1936).

67. Bismarck to Hans Kleser, May 31, 1892, Die gesammelten Werke, vol. 9 (Berlin, 1926), p. 205, and pp. 177, 217, 265; Die politischen Reden des Fürsten Bismarck, ed. H. Kohl, vol. 8 (Stuttgart, 1894-95), pp. 142, 210, 247-48; and Hermann, Hofmann, Fürst Bismarck, 1890-8 (Stuttgart, 1913-14), 1 : 397, 2 : 3Google Scholar.

68. Waldersee, Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. 2, p. 228.

69. Most Poznanian Germans were apparently unmoved by Zedlitz's blunt advice in 1892 : “Concerning the fear of Poles, I have always found … that in many respects the government and also our good countrymen themselves are seeing ghosts and that it is urgently necessary to get rid of this fear of ghosts. We have to live together in this province and I find it to be better that we get along together” ﹛Abgeordnetenhaus, Legislative Period 18 : 1, 27th Session [March 3, 1894], p. 847, as quoted by the Polish spokesman Schroeder).

70. See Heinrich von Tiedemann's speech in opposition to Zedlitz's private instruction order, Abgeordnetenhaus, Legislative Period 17 : 3, 80th Session (May 2, 1891), pp. 2111 f.

71. See Mildred, Wertheimer, The Pan-German League, 1890-1914 (New York, 1924)Google Scholar; Richard, Tims, Germanising Prussian Poland, 2nd ed. (New York, 1966)Google Scholar; and Galos, Adam, Gentzen, Felix-Heinrich, and Jakobczyk, Witold, Die Hakatisten (East Berlin, 1966)Google Scholar.

72. Rosenthal, “Caprivi's Polish Policy,” pp. 259-60.

73. Hutten-Czapski, Sechsig Jahre, p. 191.

74. See Schweinitz, Hans Lothar von, Denkwürdigkeiten, vol. 2 (Berlin, 1927), p. 213 Google Scholar, for his condemnation of Bismarck's expulsion of alien Poles in 1885.

75. “Jahresverwaltungsbericht der General-Kommission Bromberg,” October 4, 1893, quoted in Reinhard Mohn and Helmut, Seydel, “Der Kampf um Wiedergewinnung des deutschen Ostens : Erfahrungen der preussischen Ostsiedlung, 1886-1914 Festschrift für Heinrich Himmler (Darmstadt, 1941), p. 107 Google Scholar.

76. The divergent views expressed at this time by two prominent intellectuals still make interesting reading : Delbrück, Hans, Die Polenfrage (Berlin, 1894)Google Scholar, emphasized the futility of Germanizing policies; while Max Weber, in his 1895 Freiburg University Antrittsrede (“Der Nationalstaat und die Volkswirtschaftspolitik,” Gesammelte politische Schriften, ed. J. Winckelmann, 3rd ed. [Tübingen, 1971]), argued that past failures compelled even more drastic measures to protect the German East.

77. See Werner Conze, Polnische Nation und deutsche Politik im Ersten Weltkrieg (Cologne, 1958).

78. Raschdau, in Unter Bismarck und Caprivi, p. 208, described Caprivi's Polish policy in these terms.

79. “Preussen und Polen im 19. Jahrhundert,” in Deutschland und Polen, ed. A. Brackmann (Munich, 1933), p. 237.