Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: The Eyes of the World on a German Scandal
- 1 The Political Scandal and Intellectuals’ Power to Shape Perceptions
- 2 Fluid Boundaries: Politics, the Courts, and the Press in a Scandal
- 3 The Politicization of Marriage, Friendship, and Sexuality
- 4 The Ruling Elite of Wilhelmine Germany and Its Crisis of Legitimation
- 5 Suspicions of Pervasive Homosexuality in Germany’s Diplomatic Corps and Military Forces
- Conclusion: The Long End of the German Scandal
- Chronology
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
1 - The Political Scandal and Intellectuals’ Power to Shape Perceptions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2021
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: The Eyes of the World on a German Scandal
- 1 The Political Scandal and Intellectuals’ Power to Shape Perceptions
- 2 Fluid Boundaries: Politics, the Courts, and the Press in a Scandal
- 3 The Politicization of Marriage, Friendship, and Sexuality
- 4 The Ruling Elite of Wilhelmine Germany and Its Crisis of Legitimation
- 5 Suspicions of Pervasive Homosexuality in Germany’s Diplomatic Corps and Military Forces
- Conclusion: The Long End of the German Scandal
- Chronology
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Fuzzy Words and Real Men: The Press Campaign against the Eulenburg Camarilla
IN THE SUMMER OF 1906 the term “camarilla” dominated German press reports. It referred to an unknown group at the center of political power in the Empire, a clique that was allegedly trying to bring down the chancellor and then steer German politics in a new direction. For the chancellor in power, Bernhard von Bülow, who was fighting for his political survival, this nebulous menace cropped up at an opportune moment. In a widely noted speech in the Reichstag he indirectly confirmed the existence of the camarilla, calling it an alien and poisonous plant that had always been planted in Germany “solely to damage the ruler and the nation.” He stated, though, that there was no cause for concern about the emperor, however, who was not a “philistine.” This seemed a peculiar term to use in the context of the speech: only a few months later was it understood as a reference to “Phili,” the nickname of Philipp zu Eulenburg, Wilhelm II's best friend. The Berlin journalist Maximilian Harden took up the theme of general concern that the German Empire was steered by a camarilla. On 24 November 1906, his weekly Die Zukunft published an article containing the following passage: “November 1906. Night. An open field in the Ucker region. Harpist: ‘Have you read it?’ Honey: ‘On Friday already.’ Harpist: ‘Do you think there’ll be more?’ Honey: ‘We have to reckon with the possibility; he seems to be in the know, and if he's seen letters that mention “sweetheart” …’ Harpist: ‘Unthinkable! But they’ll print it everywhere. They are out to get us, no matter what it takes.’ Honey: ‘The devils! It's over! It's all over!’ Harpist: If only HE doesn't get wind of it!’” Only political insiders recognized the meaning and full implications of these allusions. The “harpist” was Eulenburg and “honey” referred to General Kuno von Moltke, a count and military commander of Berlin. Their “sweetheart” was none other than Emperor Wilhelm II.
These clearly sexual insinuations that something other than hearty masculine friendship was rife in the emperor's immediate vicinity were a political threat, one that Eulenburg and Moltke understood at once. With the rise of academic research on sexuality starting in the 1880s, knowledge about homosexuality had increased.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Eulenburg AffairA Cultural History of Politics in the German Empire, pp. 16 - 53Publisher: Boydell & BrewerPrint publication year: 2015