We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 December 2008
One of the difficulties in thinking about postwar German history comes in trying to explain the apparent absence of a paramilitary effervescence accompanying the collapse of the Third Reich. Independent military formations—Freikorps—had played a role during the 1806–1813 period, and such units had appeared again during the stormy years from 1918 to 1923, so the seeming absence of such formations in 1944/45 is quite noticeable. Charles Maier called it one of the major surprises of postwar European politics. To some extent, this perception is illusory; in truth, there were a number of Freikorps launched in 1944/45, although they failed to make a military or political impact and were therefore quickly forgotten. Considering the integral connection between previous Freikorps and the development of modern German nationalism, their relative absence in 1944/45 warrants the historian’s attention.
1. Maier, Charles S., “AHR Forum: The Two Postwar Eras and the Conditions for Stability in Twentieth-Century Western Europe,” The American Historical Review. 86, no. 2 (04 1981): 330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Burke, Peter, “History as Collective Memory,” in Memory: History, Culture and the Mind, ed., Butler, Thomas (Oxford, 1989).Google Scholar
3. For the Freikorps of 1806–1813, see Haken, I. C. L., Ferdinand von Schill: Eine Lebensbeschreibung (Leipzig, 1824);Google ScholarSchlüsser, Adolph, Geschichte des Lützowschen Freikorps: Ein Beitrag zur Kriegsgeschichte der Jahre 1813 und 1814 (Berlin, 1826);Google ScholarEiselen, J. F. G., Geschichte des Lützowschen Freicorps (Halle, 1841);Google ScholarBärsch, Georg, Ferdinand von Schill’s Zug und Tod im Jahre 1809 (Berlin);Google Scholar and von Krieglstein, Binder, Ferdinand von Schill: Ein Lebensbild (Berlin, 1902).Google Scholar For the Freikorps of 1918–1923, see Maercker, Ludwig, Vom Kaiserheer zum Reichsheer: Geschichte d. Freiwilligen Landsjägerkorps (Leipzig, 1922);Google ScholarBronnen, Arnolt, S.O.S. (London, 1930);Google Scholarvon Salomon, Ernst, The Outlaws (London, 1931);Google ScholarParkes-Perret, Ford B., ed., Hanns Johst’s Nazi Drama Schlageter (Stuttgart, 1984);Google ScholarEggers, Kurt, Annaberg (Berlin, 1933);Google ScholarZöberlein, Hans, Der Befehl des Gewissens (Munich, 1937);Google ScholarSchmidt-Pauli, Edgar v., Geschichte der Freikorps 1918–1924 (Stuttgart, 1936);Google Scholarvon Oertzen, Friedrich W., Die deutschen Freikorps 1918–1923 (Munich, 1936);Google Scholar and von Salomon, Ernst, ed., Das Buch vom deutschen Freikorpskämpfer (Berlin 1938).Google Scholar
4. Krieger, Leonard, The German Idea of Freedom (Chicago, 1957), sections I–II;Google ScholarMaier, Hans, “Die Deutschen und die Freiheit,” Zeitschrift für Politik 36, 1 (1989): 1–4;Google ScholarConze, Werner, “The Political Concept of Freedom in German History,” in Concepts of Freedom: 1776–1976, ed., Zimmermann, Hans-Joachim (Heidelberg, 1977), 111–14;Google Scholar and Hermand, Jost, Der alte Traum vom neuen Reich (Frankfurt am Main, 1988), 19–20.Google Scholar
5. Jones, Archer, The Art of War in the Western World (Oxford, 1987), 199, 254.Google Scholar
6. Jany, Curt, Geschichte der Preussichen Armee (Osnabrück, 1967) 2: 679–88;Google Scholar and von Schmidt, Paul, Der Werdegang des Preussichen Heeres (Krefeld, 1975), 134–35.Google Scholar
7. “Lied zur feierlichen Einsegnung des preussichen Freikorps,” Körners sämtliche Werke (Stuttgart, 1893) 1–2:52.Google Scholar
8. Brandt, Peter, “Einstellungen, Motive und Ziele von Kriegsfreiwilligen 1813/14: Das Freikorps Lützow,” Jahrbuch für Historische Friedensforschung 3 (1994): 222–23, 231–32;Google ScholarObermann, Emil, Soldaten—Bürger—Militaristen (Stuttgart, 1958), 149–66;Google ScholarSchulze, Hans, The Course of German Nationalism (Cambridge, 1991), 55–56;CrossRefGoogle ScholarKedourie, Elie, Nationalism (London, 1960), 38–42;Google ScholarMosse, George, Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars (New York, 1990), 27–28;Google ScholarDroz, Jacques, Le Romantisme Allemand et l’État (Paris, 1966), 187–89;Google Scholar Hermand, Der alte Traum vom neuen Reich, 33–40; Portmann-Tinguely, Albert, Romantik und Krieg (Freiburg, 1989), 23–25;Google Scholar and Krieger, The German Idea of Freedom, 90, 100–2, 104–5, 119–38.
9. Heitzer, Heinz, Insurrectionen zwischen Weser und Elbe (Berlin, 1959), chap. 3;Google Scholar Droz, Le Romantisme Allemand et l’État, 175–76; and Mosse, Fallen Soldiers, 26–27. For a revisionist analysis of the composition of the 1813 volunteer units, see Ibbeken, Rudolf, Preussen 1807–1813 (Cologne, 1970), 406–20.Google Scholar
10. Kaulbach, Hans-Martin, “Männliche Ideale von Krieg und Frieden in der Kunst der napoleonischen Ära,” Jahrbuch für Historische Friedensforschung 3 (1994): 141;Google ScholarHagemann, Karen, “Of ‘Manly Valor’ and ‘German Honor’: Nation, War and Masculinity in the Age of the Prussian Uprising against Naploeon,” Central European History 30 (1997): 208, 214, 219;CrossRefGoogle ScholarHagemann, Karen, “‘Heran, heran, zu Sieg oder Tod!’ Entwürfe patriotisch-wehrfacher Männlichkeit in der Zeit der Befreiungskriege,” in Männergeschichte/Geschlechtergeschichte: Männlichkeit im Wandel der Modeme, ed., Kühne, Thomas (Frankfurt am Main, 1996), 51–64;Google Scholar Ute Frevert, “Das Militär als Schule der Männlichkeit: Erwartungen, Angebote, Erfahrungen im 19. Jahrhundert; Hagemann, Karen, “Heldenmütter, Kriegerbräute und Amazonen: Entwürfe ‘patriotischer’ Weiblichkeit zur Zeit der Freiheitskriege,” both in Militär und Gesellschaft im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, ed. Frevert, Ute (Stuttgart, 1997), 151–53, 180;Google Scholar and Mosse, George, Nationalism and Sexuality (Madison, 1985), 100–1.Google Scholar
11. Eckermann, Walther, Ferdinand von Schill: Rebel und Patriot (Berlin, 1963);Google Scholar Brandt, “Einstellungen,” 209–33; Lange, Fritz, ed., Die Lützower: Erinnerungen, Berichte, Dokumente (Berlin, 1953);Google Scholar Ibbeken, Preussen 1807–1813, 155–58, 405–27; Szépe, Helena, “Opfertod und Poesie: Zur Geschichte der Theodor-Körner-Legende,” Colloquia Germanica 9 (1975): 291–303;Google Scholar Bärsch, Ferdinand von Schill’s Zug und Tod; Eiselen, Geschichte des Lützowschen Freicorps; Berger, Karl, Theodor Körner (Bielefeld, 1912), chaps. 6–7;Google Scholar von Krieglstein, Ferdinand von Schill; Schultz, The Course of German Nationalism, 53–54; Jany, , Geschichte der Preussischen Armee, 3: 618–22, 625–31; 4: 77–80, 87–89;Google Scholar Droz, Le Romantisme Allemand et l’État, 174–75; Kitchen, Martin, A Military History of Germany (London, 1975); 51–52;Google Scholar Mosse, Fallen Soldiers, 19–24; Obermann, Soldaten—Bürger—Militaristen, 149–50; and Heitzer, Insurrectionen, 135–38, 166–73.
12. Eksteins, Modris, Rites of Spring (Toronto, 1989), 309;Google Scholar and Berghaus, Günter, Futurism and Politics (Providence, 1996), 93–94.Google Scholar See also Koch, Hannsjoachim W., Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg: Eine Geschichte der deutschen und österreichischen Freikorps 1918–1923 (Berlin, 1978), 54.Google Scholar
13. Theweleit, Klaus, Männerphantasien (Reinbek, 1980).Google Scholar
14. Waite, Ralph, Vanguard of Nazism: The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany, 1918–1923 (Cambridge, 1952);Google ScholarJones, Nigel, Hitler’s Heralds: The Story of the Freikorps 1918–1923 (London, 1987);Google ScholarSchulze, Hagen, Freikorps und Republik 1918–1920 (Boppard am Rhein, 1969);Google ScholarVenner, Dominique, Baltikum (Paris, 1974);Google Scholar Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg; Gordon, Harold, The Reichswehr and the German Republic (Princeton, 1957), chaps. 1–2, 4;Google ScholarDiehl, James, Paramilitary Politics in Weimar Germany (Bloomington, 1977), chaps. 1–4;Google ScholarWiengartner, James, “Massacre at Mechterstädt: The Case of the Marburger Studentenkorps, 1920,” Historian 37 (1975): 598–618;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Gumbel, Emil Julius, Vier Jahre politischer Mord (Heidelberg, 1980), 128–40, 174.Google Scholar For the concept of “White Terror,” see Theweleit, Männerphantasien, 2: chap. 2.
15. Petersen, Klaus, Literatur und Justiz in der Weimarer Republik (Stuttgart, 1988), 154–59;CrossRefGoogle ScholarKetelsen, Uwe K., Literatur und Drittes Reich (Vierow bei Greifswald, 1994), 228–30;Google ScholarRitchie, J. M., German Literature under National Socialism (London, 1983), 46–47, 56–62;Google ScholarParkes-Perret, , ed., Hanns Johst’s Nazi Drama Schlageter, 54–71;Google ScholarMünch, Ursula, Weg und Werk Arnolt Bronnens: Wandlungen seines Denkens (Frankfurt am Main, 1985), 125–40, 180–94.Google Scholar For the way that Freikorps literature expanded upon themes first evident in the poetry of the War of Liberation, see Pape, Walter, “‘Männerglück’: Lyrische Kriegsagitation und Friedenssehnsucht zur Zeit der Befreiungskriege,” Jahrbuch für Historische Friedensforschung 3 (1994): 124–25.Google Scholar
16. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, 278–81; Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg, 378; Krüger, Die Brigade Ehrhardt, 123–25, 127; Ebeling, Hans and Hespers, Dieter, eds., Jugend contra Nationalsozialismus (Frechen, 1968), 155–57, 199–200;Google Scholar and Venner, Baltikum, 324–26, 328–29. For Hitler’s feelings on veteran Freikorps leaders, see Gilbert, Felix, ed., Hitler Directs His War (New York, 1950), 136, 140.Google Scholar
17. Schneemann, Emil, “Kampf urn den Sorgof,” in Das Buch vom deutschen Freikorpskämpfer, ed., von Salomon, , 338–42;Google ScholarAbsolon, Rudolf, Die Wehrmacht im Dritten Reich (Boppard, 1979), 4:270–72;Google ScholarBroszat, Martin, “Das Sudetendeutsche Freikorps,” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte 9 (1961): 30–49;Google Scholar and Liška, Zdaněk, “Vznik tzv. Ašsku v Závrí,” Historie a Vojenstvi 34 (1985): 56–68.Google Scholar
18. Seth, Ronald, Jackals of the Third Reich: The Story of the British Free Corps (London, 1973);Google ScholarRebatet, Lucien, Les mémoires d’un fasciste 1941–1947 (Paris, 1976), 2:209–10;Google ScholarReady, J. Lee, The Forgotten Axis (Jefferson, NC, 1987), 67, 197–98;Google Scholar and Picker, Henry, ed., Hitlers Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquaetier (Stuttgart, 1976), 369–70.Google Scholar Prince Anton Turkel was a Tsarist émigré who led a Schutzkorps of expatriate Russians formed in order to fight partisans in Yugoslavia. For specific reference to Turkel’s unit as a Freikorps, see Ultra Document KO 1007, 21 April 1945, reel 12, Ultra Microfilm Collection (hereafter UMC).
19. Ketelsen, Literatur und Drittes Reich, 87.
20. As reported by DNB and cited in German Propaganda and the German, 2 October 1944, Public Records Office (hereafter PRO), Foreign Office (hereafter FO) 898/187.
21. Ansprache an Volkssturmmänner in Bartenstein on 18 October 1944, Bundesarchiv, NS 19/4016.
22. For the historic antipathy of senior military leaders to the formation of Freikorps during the Seven Years’ War, the Napoleonic Wars, and the post-World War I period, see Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg, 45; von Kriegistein, , Ferdinand von Schill, 90, 95–96;Google Scholar Gordon, The Reichswehr and the German Republic, 53–54; and Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, 183–88.
23. As reported by DNB and cited in German Propaganda and the German, 2 October 1944, PRO, FO 898/187.
24. Grundsätzliche Anordnung für die Erfassung zum Deutschen Volkssturm, Records of the NSDAP, microcopy #T–81, reel 93, frame 107816, German Military Records Microfilm Collection (hereafter GMRMC).
25. A German officer taken prisoner and interrogated by the Soviets said that creation of Freikorps was a natural response to pending Polish territorial gains in the east. Stimmungsbericht über die Versammlung on 10 August 1944 Lager 97. Zur Dekiaration des polnischen Komitees der nat. Befreiung, 10 August 1944, Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR im Bundesarchiv, NY 4036/572.
26. Golabek, Czeslaw and Tryc, Ryszard, “Z Genezy Powstania i Dzialalnosci Werwolfu na Polskich Ziemiach Zachodnich,” Wojskowy Przeglad Historyczny 8 (1963): 133, 136.Google Scholar
27. Spieler, Silke, ed., Vertreibung und Vertreibungsbrechen 1945–1948 (Bonn, 1989), 241.Google Scholar
28. Görlitz, Walter, Der zweite Weltkrieg 1939–1948 (Stuttgart, 1952), 2:476.Google Scholar
29. Ultra Documents BT 9963, 9 April 1945, reel 69; and KO 1581, 28 April 1945, reel 73, both in UMC.
30. Tissier, Tony le, The Battle of Berlin, 1945 (London, 1988), 31, 141, 158;Google ScholarGostony, Peter, ed., Der Kampf um Berlin 1945 (Düsseldorf 1970), 269;Google ScholarRose, Arno, Werwolf 1944–1945 (Stuttgart, 1980), 282–83;Google ScholarSayer, Ian and Botting, Douglas, Hitler’s Last General (London, 1989), 293, 296;Google Scholar and Galante, Pierre and Silianoff, Eugene, Last Witnesses in the Bunker (London, 1979), 160.Google Scholar
31. Timm, Willy, Freikorps “Sauerland” 1944–1945: Zur Geschichte des Zweiten Weltkrieges in Südwestfalen (Hagen, 1976), 8;Google ScholarKitchen, Martin, Nazi Germany at War (London, 1995), 21;Google Scholar and Franz Hofer, “National Redoubt,” 6–7, World War II German Military Studies, ed., Detwiler, Donald S. (New York, 1979), 24.Google Scholar
32. Timm, Freikorps “Sauerland,” 8–25; Seidler, Franz, “Deutscher Volkssturm”: Das letzte Aufgebot 1944/45 (Munich, 1991), 54, 113–14;Google Scholar Rose, Werwolf, 282; Meyerhoff, Hermann, ed., Herne 1933–1945: Die Zeit des Nationalsozialismus (Herne, 1963), 140–41;Google Scholar Ultra Documents BT 7217, 14 March 1945, reel 65; BT 7457, 17 March 1945, reel 65, both in UMC; Brause to all Kreisstabsführer, Regimentsführer and Bataillonsführer of Freikorps Sauerland, 23 January 1945, frame 108558, reel 94; Wehnert to Schwenk, 5 March 1945, frame 107804, reel 93; Hoth to DRK-Bereitschaften in Kreisstelle Ennepe-Ruhr, 2 February 1945, frame 107807, reel 93, all in Records of the NSDAP, microcopy no. T-81, GMRMC; Bauer, Fritz et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam, 1972/1973), 8: 419–21;Google Scholar and 10:282. For evidence that the Freikorps was trained for guerrilla warfare, see the interrogation records of B. Sievening, 326th Infantry Division, captured on 15 January 1945 near Fech. Mobile Field Interrogation Unit no. 1, PW Intelligence Bulletin no. 1/32, 30 January 1945, US National Archives (hereafter NA), G-2 Intelligence Division Captured Personnel and Material Branch, Enemy POW Interrogation File (MIS-Y), 1943–1945, Record Group (hereafter RG) 165.
33. Rose, Werwolf, 281; andSchwarzwälder, Herbert, Bremen und Nordwestdeutschland am Kriegsende 1945 (Bremen, 1973), 2:70.Google Scholar
34. Gilbert, , ed., Hitler Directs His War, 136, 140.Google Scholar
35. Goebbels told the Gauleiter on 30 March 1945 that “on the recommendation of leading party comrades,” the Führer had agreed to let the Freikorps bear his name. Gauleiter K. Wahl, Rundspruch no. 11 an alle Kreisleiter, 30 March 1945, frame 300554, reel 162, Records of the NSDAP, microcopy no. T–81, GMRMC.
36. Smelser, Ronald, Robert Ley: Hitler’s Labour Front Leader (Oxford, 1988), 11–17, 30–31, 309;Google Scholar Rose, Werwolf, 280; Trevor-Roper, Hugh, ed., Final Entries, 1945—The Diaries of Joseph Goebbels (New York, 1978), 269–70;Google Scholar U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center, Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; and German Propaganda and the German, 23 April 1945, PRO, FO 898/187.
37. U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
38. German Propaganda and the German, 23 April 1945, PRO, FO 898/187.
39. Guderian, Heinz, Erinnerungen eines Soldaten (Neckargemünd, 1960), 381;Google Scholar and Gilbert, , ed., Hitler Directs His War, 136, 140.Google Scholar Ley’s reference to the Upper Rhine front strongly suggests that he had knowledge of the Führer’s earlier comments.
40. Trevor-Roper, , ed., Final Entries, 1945, 243, 278–79.Google Scholar Rudolf Semmier noted that “Ley is being enthusiastically backed by Hitler.” Semmler, Rudolf, Goebbels—The Man Next to Hitler (London, 1947), 190.Google Scholar
41. General-Inspekteur d. Pz.-Truppen, Richtlinien für die Durchführung der Panzerabwehr im rückwärtigen Gebiet und in den Grenzwehrkreisen, 1 January 1945, frames 109899–903; Kommandant, Wehrmachtkommandanteur, Hamburg to Koppenberg, 11 April 1945, frames 109887–8, both in reel 95, Records of the NSDAP, microcopy no. T–81, GMRMC; and Seidler, “Deutscher Volkssturm”, 149–50, 317–18.
42. Rose, Werwolf, 281.
43. Semmler, Goebbels, 190; and German Propaganda and the German, 23 April 1945, PRO, FO 898/187.
44. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam, 1969), 3:94–95.Google Scholar
45. History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 10:98; 26:44, NA; British Troops Austria, Joint Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 9, 31 August 1945, PRO, FO 1007/300; and CSDIC/WEA UAOR, Appendix C, Report on Nursery, SIR 28, Part 1, 18 April 1946, NA, ETO MIS-Y-Sect. Miscellaneous Intelligence and Interrogation Reports 1945–1946, RG 332.Google Scholar
46. Rose, Werwolf 281–82; and History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 26:43, NA.Google Scholar
47. German Propaganda and the German, 23 April 1945, PRO, FO 898/187.
48. Trevor-Roper, , ed., Final Entries, 1945, 269.Google Scholar
49. German Propaganda and the German, 23 April 1945, PRO, FO 898/187.
50. Trevor-Roper, , ed., Final Entriess, 1945, 234, 261, 269–70.Google Scholar Doubts about the Freikorps by senior party figures like Goebbels involved Ley’s problematic leadership skills, as well as the questionable wisdom of launching a new paramilitary group at a time of great shortages in manpower and material. Rose, Werwolf, 280.
51. Gauleiter K. Wahl, Rundspruch no. 11 an alle Kreisleiter, 30 March 1945, frames 300554–5, reel 162, Records of the NSDAP, microcopy no. T–81, GMRMC.
52. Trevor-Roper, , ed., Final Entries, 1945, 270.Google Scholar
53. Ultra Document KO 1402, 25 April 1945, reel 72, UMC; and Air P/W Interrogation Unit, 1st Tactical AF (Prov.) (Adv.), Detailed Interrogation of an ME 109 Pilot, 25 April 1945, NA, 127823, RG 226. Ley told American interrogators that the Freikorps was organized by the staff of the DAF. U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center, Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
54. Burgel to Walkenhorst, 4 April 1945, Biographical Records (NSDAP, Reich Ministries, etc.), reel 78, microform no. T–580, GMRMC; Kästner, Erich, Notabene 45 (Berlin, 1961), 94;Google Scholar British Troops in Austria, Joint Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 5, 3 August 1945, PRO, FO 1007/300; and History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 20:98,Google Scholar NA. For mention of the Freikorps Adolf Hitler in Vorarlberg, see Rauchensteiner, Manfred, Österreich 1945 (Vienna, 1970), 256.Google Scholar
55. SHAEF G–5, Weekly Journal of Information no. 11, 4 May 1945, PRO, War Office (hereafter WO) 219/3918; CSDIC/WEA BAOR, Report on Nursery, SIR no. 28, 18 April 1946, Appendix “H,” NA, ETO MIS-Y-Sect. Intelligence and Interrogation Records 1945–1946, RG 332; and Rose, Werwolf, 281–82.
56. History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 26:43, NA; and CSDIC/WEA BAOR Appendix H, Report on Nursery, SIR 28, Part I, 18 April 1946, NA, ETO MIS-Y-Sect. Intelligence and Interrogation Records 1945–1946, RG 332.Google Scholar
57. 5th Corps, Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 1, 11 July 1945, PRO, FO 1007/299.
58. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 2:138; 3:385; and 11:102.Google Scholar
59. Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal (Nuremburg, 1948), 14:580;Google Scholar Summary no. 166—Baldur von Schirach, Imperial War Museum, Office of the U.S. Chief Counsel, Subs. Proceedings Div., Interrogation Branch; and von Lang, Jochen, Der Hitler-Junge—Baldur von Schirach: Der Mann, der Deutschlands Jugend erzog (Hamburg, 1988), 380.Google Scholar
60. Enemy Personnel Exploitation Section, Field Information Agency Technical CC(BE), Two Brief Discussions of German CW Policy with Albert Speer, 12 October 1945, NA, XL 22959, RG 226; Air P/W Interrogation Unit, 1st Tactical AF (Prov.) (Adv.); detailed Interrogation of an ME 109 Pilot, 15 April 1945, NA, 12723, RG 226; Guderian, Erinnerungen, 381; and History of the Counter Intellience Corps, 26:43, NA.Google Scholar
61. Speer, Albert, Inside the Third Reich (New York, 1970), 549–50.Google Scholar
62. Goebbels recognized this factor and asked Ley, tongue in cheek, whether the Freikorps would challenge Allied bomber formations. Ley, too dumb to recognize sarcasm at his expense, replied “that even the enemy air force would have to give way before such fanaticism.” Semmier, Goebbels, 190.
63. Gauleiter K. Wahl, Rundspruch no. 11 an alle Kreisleiter, 30 March 1945, frame 300554, reel 162, Records of the NSDAP. microcopy no. t-81, GMRMC.
64. Navarre, Henri, Le temps des vérités (Paris, 1957), 183;Google ScholarBauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 3:90;Google Scholar Seidler, “Deutscher Volkssturm,” 346; le Tissier, The Battle of Berlin, 31; and U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center, Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
65. Ultra Document KO 1581, 28 April 1945, UMC.
66. U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center, Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; and Smeltser, Robert Ley, 292.
67. The Daily Express, 19 May 1945; and The New York Times, 17 May 1945.
68. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 8:419–29;Google Scholar 10:255–63, 281–91. It should be noted, in favor of Freikorps Sauerland, that when white flags were seen flying from houses near Herne on 8 April, and the local Kreisleiter ordered Freikorps troopers to destroy these homes, the mission was refused. Meyerhoff, , ed., Herne 1933–1945, 142.Google Scholar
69. Bauer, et al. eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 2:787–97.Google Scholar
70. Theweleit, , Mannerphantasien, 1:74–77, 83.Google Scholar
71. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 3:67–128;Google Scholar 8:560–657; 13:478–582; Klaus Tenfelde, “Proletarische Provinz: Radikalisierung und Widerstand in Penzberg/Oberbayern 1900 bis 1945” Troll, Hildebrandt, “Aktionen zur Kriegsbeendung im Frühjahr 1945”, both in Bayern in dee NS Zeit, eds., Broszat, Martin, Fröhlich, Elke, Grossmann, Anton (Munich, 1981), part C, 4:375–77,Google Scholar 380–81, 671–72; and Bretschneider, Heike, Der Widerstand gegen den Nationalsozialismus in München 1933 bis 1945 (Munich, 1968), 236.Google Scholar
72. Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, 186. Von Salomon argued that “real Freikorps” had to have the “primitive Freebooter spirit.”
73. Setzer to all Kreisstabsführer des Deutschen Volkssturms, 1 February 1945, Records of the NSDAP. frame 108548, microcopy no. T–81, GMRMC.
74. Krüger, Die Brigade Ehrhardt, 127.
75. Ibid, 127; Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, 266, 277–78; and Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg, 72.
76. Mobile Field Interrogation Unit no. 1, PW Intelligence Bulletin no. 1/32, 30 January 1945, NA, G–2 Intelligence Division Captured Personnel and Material Branch Enemy POW Interrogation File (MIS–Y), 1943–1945, RG 165.
77. History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 26:43, NA.Google Scholar
78. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 3:94–5.Google Scholar
79. von Salomon, Fragebogen, 497–98.
80. Gilbert, , ed., Hitler Directs His War, 133–36, 140.Google Scholar
81. Air P/W Interrogation Unit, 1st Tactical AF (Prov.) (Adv.), Detailed Interrogation of an ME 109 Pilot, 25 April 1945, NA, 127823, RG 226.
82. Maier, “AHR Forum: Two Postwar Eras,” 330; Diehl, James, The Thanks of the Fatherland: German Veterans after the Second World War (Chapel Hill, 1993), 70, 227–28, 230–32, 235;Google Scholar and Mosse, Fallen Soldiers, 201–3, 209–10, 212.
83. Messerschmidt, Manfred, Die Wehrmacht im NS-Staat (Hamburg, 1969);Google ScholarBerghahn, Volker, “NSDAP und ‘geistige Führung derWehrmacht 1939–1945,’” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte 17 (1969): 17–71;Google Scholar and Bartov, Omer, The Eastern Front, 1941–1945 (London, 1985).Google Scholar
84. The fact that the Wehrmacht leadership kept order at the front by executing 30,000 of its own troops, many of them in the final phase of the war, does not suggest possibilities for the kind of voluntarism needed to launch Freikorps. See Messerschmidt, Manfred and Wüllner, Friz, Die Wehrmachtjustiz im Dienst des Nationalsozialismus: Zerstörung einer Legende (Baden-Baden, 1987), chaps. 4–5.Google Scholar
85. A National Socialist Leadership Corps report in 1943 noted that after the Machtergreifung “the German officer corps lost its unity as a school of thought and thus its character as an ‘order’ [i.e., comparable to the Jesuits, the Freemasons, the SS, etc.’ It was hitherto the weltanschauliche pillar of the German people, but it then stood pushed to the side, where it still sometimes stands today, devoid of ideas or with, at best, a weak ideological character‥” Dr. Huebner, Abschrift, 4 October 1943, Biographical Records (NSDAP, Reich Ministeries, etc.), reel 78, microform no. T–580, GMRMC.
86. See, for instance, Geyer, Michael, Aufrüstung oder Sicherheit: Die Reichswehr in der Krise der Machtpolitik 1924–1936 (Wiesbaden, 1980).Google Scholar
87. Lt. Priester, Schule VI für Fahnenjunker der Infanterie, 2 February 1945, Biographical Records (NSDAP, Reich Ministries, etc.), reel 78, microform no. T-580 GMRMC.
88. Omer Bartov claims that German small unit cohesion had begun to break down as early as the end of 1941, at least on the Russian Front. Bartov, Omer, Hitler’s Army: Soldiers, Nazis, and War in the Third Reich (Oxford, 1992), chap. 2.Google Scholar Earlier writers who had emphasized the importance of primary groups claimed that complex German recruitment and training arrangements only collapsed in the last phase of the war, thus eroding the tightness and high morale earlier typical of German formations. Shils, Edward A. and Janowirz, Morris, “Cohesion and Disintigrarion in the Wehrmacht in World War II,” in idem, Military Conflict: Essays in the Institutional Anaylsis of War and Peace (Beverly Hills, 1975), 178–90;Google Scholar and van Creveld, Martin, Fighting Power: German and US. Army Peformance, 1939–1945 (Westport, 1982), 75–76.Google Scholar
89. Kissel, Hans, Der deutsche Volkssturm 1944/45; Eine territoriale Miliz im Rahmen der Landesverteidigung (Frankfurt am Main, 1962), 81;Google ScholarSteinert, Marlis, Capitulation 1945: The Story of the Dönitz Regime (London, 1969), 182–83;Google Scholar and Müller to Dönitz, 5 May 1945, frame 5611862, reel 864, Records of OKW, microcopy no. T–77, GMRMC.
90. U.S. 7th Army Interrogation Center, Interrogation of Dr. Robert Ley, 29 May 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; Hoffmann to Kreisleiter, Kreistabsführer of the German Volkssturm, and Leaders of the Kreiskomissionen, 22 February 1945, frames 107805–6, reel 93; NSDAP Gauleitung Schwaben, Rundschreiben no. 96/45, 18 April 1945. frame 300551, reel 162, both in Records of the NSDAP, microcopy no. T–81, GMRMC; SHAEF Rear G–2, EDS to SHAEF Main for G–2 (Cl), 19 June 1945, PRO. WO 219/1603; and Timm, Freikorps “Sauerland,” 10–11. For the description of a seventy man Freikorps Adolf Hitler unit that withdrew into the Alps in April 1945 and was comprised almost entirely of “Politische Leiter,” see lère Armée française, 2ème Bureau, “Bulletin de renseignements,” 16 May 1945, Annex 4, Service historique de l’armée de terre, 7P 125.
91. Krüger, Die Brigade Ehrhardt, 127.
92. Jünger, Ernst, Tagebücher 3: Strahlun, gen—Zweiter Teil (Stuttgart, 1960), 462, 466–68.Google Scholar
93. Paetel, Karl O., Ernst Jünger (Stuttgart. 1949), 193–94, 196Google Scholar. For “heroic realism,” see Herbert, Ulrich, Best (Bonn, 1996), 88–100.Google Scholar
94. Von Salomon, Fragebogen, 495–97.
95. CSDIC (WEA)/BAOR, Report on Nursery, SIR no. 28, 18 April 1945, Appendix H, NA, ETO MIS-Y-Sect. Intelligence and Interrogation Records, 1945–1946, RG 226; 5th Corps Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 1, 11 July 1945, PRO, FO 1007/299; and Koonz, Claudia, Mothers in the Fatherland (New York, 1987), 23–xxiv, 398.Google Scholar
96. Theweleit, Männerphantasien 1: chap. 1.
97. Note, for instance, the bemused reaction of SS Leibstandarte men outside the Führer’s bunker when they were approached (circa 24/25 April) by a female Freikorps volunteer. They immediately identified the woman as a prostitute, and while they appreciated the way she filled out her field tunic and riding breeches, there was no question of their accepting her help. Schenck, Ernst-Günther, Ich sah Berlin sterben (Herford, 1970), 87–88.Google Scholar
98. Hagemann, “Of ‘Manly Valor’ and ‘German Honor,’” 193–94, 208, 211–14, 219; Hagemann, “Heldenmütter, Kriegerbräute und Amazonen,” 179, 185–95, Pape, “‘Männerglück,’” 116–24; Mosse, Nationalism and Sexuality, 18, 90–95, 97–99; and Spickernagel, Ellen, “‘So soll dein Bild auf unseren Fahnen schweben’: Kultur und Geschlechterpolitik in der Napoleonischen Ära,” Jahrbuch für Historische Friedensforschung 3 (1994): 160–63, 166–68.Google Scholar The best representation of this dichotomy, especially as it pertained to Freikorps, was a pair of famous paintings by the Saxon romantic artist Georg Friedrich Kersting, both dating from 1815. In the first picture, Kersten, a veteran of the Lützow Freikorps, portrayed three of his comrades—all eventually killed—on duty at a forward post in an oak grove. The second painting depicted a lonely blond woman in white, again situated amid a cluster of oaks, winding wreaths. The names of the fallen heroes were shown engraved in the oaks. Spickernagel, “‘So soil dein Bild,’” 1966–1969.
99. Reder, Dirk-Alexander, “‘Natur und Sitte verbieten uns die Waffe der Zerstörung zu führen…’: Patriotische Frauen zwischen Frieden und Krieg,” Jahrbuch für Historische Friedensforschung 3 (1944): 174–75;Google Scholar Hagemann, “Heldenmütter,” 196–99; and Mosse, Nationalism and Sexuality, 101.
100. Weser-Kurier, 5 December 1945; 29 December 1945; 3 January 1946; 5 January 1946; 9 January 1946; 16 January 1946; 26 January 1946; 2 March 1946; and Die Neue Zeitung, 28 February 1947. For figures on released POWs from the lost eastern provinces, see Weser-Kurier, 28 May 1947.
101. For allied policy toward Freikorps in the Baltic provinces, see Venner, Baltikum, 119; Volkmann, Hans-Erich, “Der Bericht Generalleutnants Walter von Eberhardt ‘Meine Tätigkeit im Baltikum,’” Zeitschrft für Ostforschung 13 (1964): 728–33;Google ScholarVolkmann, Hans-Erich, “Die jüngste Veröffentlichung zur Baltischen Frage der Jahre 1918–1919,” Zeitschrft für Ostforschung 14 (1965): 329–32;Google ScholarMayer, Arno, Politics and Diplomacy of Peacemaking (New York, 1967), 317–18;Google Scholar Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg, 135–37; Sullivan, “German Free Corps in the Baltic,” 125; Jones, Hitler’s Heralds, 114–15; Waite, Vanguard of Nazism, 100–3; and Walwort, Arthur, Wilson and His Peacemakers (New York, 1968), 251–52.Google Scholar For Allied tolerance of Freikorps activity in the Ruhr, see Morgan, J. H., Assize of Arms (London, 1945), 146–53;Google ScholarEliasberg, George, Der Ruhrkrieg von 1920 (Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 1974), 212–17;Google Scholar Koch, Der deutsche Bürgerkrieg, 219–22; and Salewski, Michael, Entwaffnung und Militär Kontrolle in Deutschland 1919–1927 (Munich, 1966), 40–49.Google Scholar Although the British and Italians were willing to allow German volunteer units to suppress a leftist uprising in the demilitarized areas of the Ruhr, the French continued to fear the German military more than the Red Army. As a reprisal for Freikorps operations in the demilitarized zone, they briefly occupied several towns in Hesse, including Frankfurt.
102. Gajda, Patricia, Postscript to Victory: British Policy and the German-Polish Borderlands, 1919–1925 (Washington, D.C., 1982), 96–97, 122–33, 139–40.Google Scholar
103. Lauterbacher, Hartmann, Erlebt und mitgestaltet: Kronzeuge einer Epoche 1923–1945. Zu neuen Ufern nach Kriegsende (Preussisch Oldendorf, 1984), 342–43.Google Scholar For the only serious study contending that the Allies considered using German volunteer formations against the Russians, see Smith, Arthur, Churchill’s German Army: Wartime Strategy and Cold War Politics, 1943–1947 (Beverly Hills, 1977).Google Scholar
104. CCG(BE) Research Branch, HQ/2404 (Res), The Freikorps, 7 June 1945, PRO, FO 37 1/46876.
105. Diehl, The Thanks of the Fatherland, 229–30.
106. Maier, “AHR Forum: The Two Postwar Eras,” 331–32.
107. CCG(BE) Research Branch, HQ/2424 (Res), The Freikorps, 7 June 1945, PRO, 371/46876; NA, Study on the Freikorps, NA, XL 17275, RG 226; and 21st AG, CI News Sheet no. 7, 5 October 1944, Part I, PRO, WO 205/997. See also Diehl, The Thanks of the Fatherland, 56–57. Influential officers like Colonel Dick White in SHAEF Counter-Intelligence—a future head of MI–5—were struck by the Freikorps precedent, and the “problems it created for the occupying forces.” White called this an “interesting and important” issue. White to Sheen and MacLoed, 12 February 1945, PRO, WO 219/1602.
108. USFET G–2 Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 33, 28 February 1946, NA, State Dept. Decimal File 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
109. MI–14/15/530/44, The possibility of short and long-term German guerrilla and underground resistance, NA, 1097987, RG 226.
110. SHAEF G–3, Post-Hostilities Handbook, 20, PRO, WO 219/3868.
111. See, for instance, Madsen, Chris, “Victims of Circumstance: The Execution of German Deserters by Surrendered German Troops under Canadian Control in Amsterdam, May 1945,” Canadian Military History 2 (1993): 93–113;Google Scholar and Madsen, Chris, The Royal Navy and German Naval Disarmament, 1942–1947 (London, 1998), 87–90.Google Scholar
112. Daily Express, 7 June 1945; and Elliot, Maj., Scarlet to Green: A History of Intelligence in the Canadian Army, 1903–1963 (Toronto, 1981), 347.Google Scholar
113. H. G. Sheen, SHAEF G–2 (Cl) to SHAEF G–2 AOCC, 31 January 1945, PRO, WO 219/1578; and Diehl, The Thanks of the Fatherland, 67. Unauthorized movement of German soldiers away from Wehrmacht concentration areas was rare because no one without discharge papers could obtain a ration card. Lt. Col. J. H. B. Lowe, Report on the Visit to the British Zone in Germany and British Sector in Berlin, September 1945, PRO, FO 371/46935.
114. Smith, Arthur, Heimkehr aus dem Zweiten Weltkrieg: Die Entlassung der deutschen Kriegsgefangenen (Stuttgart, 1985), 27–32,CrossRefGoogle Scholar chaps. 2–4, 7; and Diehl, Thanks of the Fatherland, 57–58.
115. 21st Army Group Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 3, 21 July 1945; no. 4, 28 July 1945, both in PRO, FO 371/46933; and BAOR Forthnightly Intelligence Summary no. 12, 6 October 1945, PRO, FO 371/46935.
116. Diehl, The Thanks of the Fatherland, 55, 58–60, 64–65, 71, 232, 240.
117. Rosenfeld, Gavriel D., “Monuments and the Politics of Memory: Commemorating Kurt Eisner and the Bavarian Revolutions of 1918–1919 in Postwar Munich,” Central European History 30 (1997): 234–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
118. Die Neue Zeitung, 21 October 1945; 12 July 1946; Glaser, Hermann, Kulturgeschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Munich, 1985), 1:138–39;Google ScholarSchnell, Ralf, Die Literatur der Bundesrepublik (Stuttgart, 1986), 84–85;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Peterson, Edward, The American Occupation of Germany; Retreat to Victory (Detroit, 1977), 157, 162.Google Scholar
119. ACC Report for the Moscow Meeting of the CFM, 1947, section II–Denazificanon, Part 9, Report on the French Zone of Occupation, PRO, FO 37 1/64352.
120. Bauer, et al. , eds., Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, 3: 67, 70, 87–89, 112–15;Google Scholar Tenfelde, “Proletarische Provinz,” 380–81; and Ritchie, J. M., German Literature under National Socialism (London, 1983), 101.Google Scholar
121. Die Neue Zeitung, 31 May 1946; 12 July 1946; Jünger, , Tagebücher 3, 548–49;Google Scholar Paetel, Ernst Jünger, 173, 194; Baumer, Franz, Ernst Jünger (Berlin, 1967), 80;Google ScholarKaempfer, Wolfgang, Ernst Jünger (Stuttgart, 1981), 47;CrossRefGoogle ScholarStark, S. D., “Ernst Jünger and the Peace,” Queen’s Quarterly 54 (1947): 147–51;Google ScholarClair, Louis, “Ernst Jünger: From Nihilism to Tradition,” Partisan Review 14, no. 5 (1947): 462;Google Scholar and USFET G–2 Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 31, 14 February 1946, NA, State Dept. Decimal File 1945–49, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
122. von Salomon, Fragebogen, 416–525.
123. Die Neue Zeitung, 31 May 1946; 12 July 1946; and Zentner, Christian and Bedürftig, Friedmann, eds., The Encyclopedia of the Third Reich (New York, 1991), 1:475.Google Scholar
124. For instances of young Germans caught conducting drill exercises or attempting to hold maneuvres, see The Stars and Stripes, 12 July 1945; USFET G–2 Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 31, 14 February 1946; Eucom Intelligence Summary no. 37, 6 July 1948, both in NA, State Dept. Decimal File 1945–49, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; and US Constabulary G–2 Weekly Intelligence Report no. 17, 4 October 1946, Annex no. 1, NA, WWII Operations Reports, RG 407.
125. CCG (BE) Research Branch, HQ/4155 (Res), Intermediate Resistance in Germany. 25 April 1945, NA, 129323, RG 226; CCG(BE) Research Branch, HQ/4204 (Res), The Freikorps. 7 Junes 1945, PRO, FO 371/46876; and USFET G–2 Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 33, 28 February 1946, NA, State Dept. Decimal File 1945–49, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59.
126. GSI 8th Army, Joint Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 5, 3 August 1945, PRO, FO 371/46611; CSDIC/WEA BAOR, Report on Nursury, SIR 28, 18 April 1946, Appendix H, NA, ETO MIS-Y-Sect. Intelligence and Interrogation Records 1945–46, RG 332; British Troops Austria, Joint Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 5, 3 August 1945, PRO, FO 1007/300; 5 Corps, Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 1, 11 July 1945, PRO, FO 1007/299; and Ml–14, Mitropa no. 4, 8 September 1945, PRO, FO 371/46967.
127. History of the Counter Intelligence Corps, 26:44, NA.Google Scholar
128. ACC Report of the Moscow CFM Meeting, February 1947, section II, Denazification, part 9, French Report, PRO, FO 371/64352; and MI–14, Mitropa no. 12, 29 December 1945, PRO, FO 371/55630.
129. USFET G–2 Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 42, 2 May 1946, NA, State Dept. Decimal File 1945–49, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; and 250 British Liaison Mission Report no. 7, April 1947, PRO, FO 371/64350.
130. Pogranichnye Voiska SSSR Mai 1945–1950 (Moscow, 1975), 157;Google Scholar and Misztal, Jan, “Dzialalność Propagandowa Podziemia Poniemieckiego na Ślasku Opolskim w Latach 1945–1949,” Kwartalnik Historyczny 85 (1978): 53.Google Scholar
131. USGCC, Observations on the Situation in Munich, 16 July 1945, NA, State Dept. Decimal Files 1945–1949, 740.00119 Control (Germany), RG 59; MI–14, Mitropa no. 4, 8 September 1945, PRO, FO 371/46967; and ACA Intelligence Organisation, Joint Weekly Intelligence Summary no. 11, 14 September 1945, PRO, FO 371/46967.
132. MI–14, Mitropa no. 12, 29 December 1945, PRO, FO 371/55630.
133. CCG(BE) Research Branch, HQ/4204 (Res), The Freikorps, 7 June 1945, PRO, FO 371/46876; and Robert Kempner, Blueprint for the Nazi underground as Revealed in Confidential Police Reports, 30 October 1943, NA, OMGUS ODI Miscellaneous Reports, RG 260.
134. Die Neue Zeitung, 16 August 1946; 2 September 1946; 17 February 1947; 28 February 1947; 3 March 1947; Weser-Kurier, 4 December 1946; 7 December 1946; Neue Württembergische Zeitung, 28 February 1947; and 4 March 1947.
135. Long, Wellington, The New Nazis of Germany (Philadelphia, 1968), 98–99;Google ScholarKnutter, Hans Helmuth, Ideologien des Rechisradikalismus in Nachkriegsdeutschland (Bonn, 1961), 37;Google Scholar and Tauber, Kurt, Beyond Eagle and Swastika: German Nationalism since 1945 (Middletown, 1967), 2: 1116–17.Google Scholar After its formation in the summer of 1951, Freikorps Deutschland managed to train about 2,000 men, although arms had not been obtained before the group was dissolved. Most of the leaders were former mid-level Nazis, although a few old Freikorps and SA figures were also involved, particularly Walter Stennes. The Freikorps was probably dissolved in order to prevent it from becoming a legal channel for elements of the Socialist Reich Party, which had already been prohibited.
136. Diehl, The Thanks of the Fatherland, chaps. 4–7, 233–42. See also Smith, Heimkehr aus dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, 180–86. A few German training officers and NCOs attempted to create a Freikorps ethos in the Bundeswehr’s new airborne infantry, but the plot was uncovered and the offending officers and noncoms arrested or transferred to other units. Tauber, , The Eagle and the Swastika, 1:312–13.Google Scholar
137. Tauber, , The Eagle and the Swastika, 1:850.Google Scholar
138. The categories on which this discussion is based are drawn (albeit in much amended form) from Schwartz, Barry, “The Reconstruction of Abraham Lincoln,” in Collective Remetnbering, ed. Middleton, David and Edwards, Derek (London, 1990), 81–82;Google Scholar and Schwartz, Barry, “The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory,” Social Forces 61 (1982): 376–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
139. Soderholm, James, “Byron, Nietzsche, and the Mystery of Forgetting,” Clio 23 (1993): 56;Google ScholarMan, Paul de, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism (Minneapolis, 1983), 145–51;Google ScholarMarwick, Arthur, The Nature of History (London, 1970), 78–81;Google ScholarMead, George Herbert, The Philosophy of the Present (La Salle, 1959), 28–31;Google ScholarGilloch, Graeme, Myth and Metropolis: Walter Benjamin and the City (Cambridge, 1996), 107–8;Google ScholarDouglas, Mary, Evans-Pritchard (Brighton, 1980), 83–85;Google ScholarHalbwachs, Maurice, On Collective Memory (Chicago, 1992);Google ScholarThelen, David, “Memory and American History,” Journal of American History 75 (1989): 1123–27;CrossRefGoogle ScholarDescombes, Vincent, Modern French Philosophy (Cambridge, 1980), 116–17;Google ScholarLowenthal, David, The Past Is a Foreign Country (Cambridge, 1985);Google Scholar and Hobsbawm, Eric, “Introduction: Inventing Traditions,” in The Invention of Tradition, ed. Hobsbawm, Eric and Ranger, Terence (Cambridge, 1983), 12–14.Google Scholar
140. Middleton, David and Edwards, Derek, “Introduction,” and Schwartz, “The Reconstruction of Abraham Lincoln,” both in Collective Remaining, 7–12, 82–83;Google ScholarCoser, Lewis, “Introduction: Maurice Halbwachs, 1877–1945,” in On Collective Memory, 25–26;Google ScholarRenan, Ernest, “Qu’est-ce qu’une Nation?” in Oevres Complètes de Ernest Renan (Paris, 1947), 1:891–92, 904;Google ScholarAnderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities (London, 1991), 199–201;Google Scholar and Irwin-Zarecka, Iwona, Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory (New Brunswick, 1944), 126–28.Google Scholar
141. Jung, C. G., Die Archetypen und das kollektive Unbewusste (Olten, 1976), 55–57;Google ScholarEvans, Richard, Jung on Elementary Psychology (New York, 1976), 65–74;Google Scholar and von Franz, Marie-Louise, C. G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time (New York, 1975), 126, 128–29, 133–34.Google Scholar
142. Eliade, Mircea, cited in Shorter, Boni, “Memory in Service of Psyche,” in Memory, History, Culture and the Mind, ed. Butler, Thomas (Oxford, 1989), 68.Google Scholar
143. For the heroic archetype, see Campbell, Joseph, The Hero with a Thousand Faces (Cleveland, 1956).Google Scholar
144. The term Freikorps remains a source of inspiration for neo-Nazis. In May 1997, Kameradschafl Freikorps und Bund Oberland managed to gather about 400 people in Schliersee in order to celebrate the seventy-sixth anniversary of the Battle of Annaberg. In February of the following year, four teenage members of Freikorps Berlin were suspected of participating in a strsng of home invasions, robberies, and beatings. “Antifaschitische Nachrichten” 6/1997, http://www.infolinks.de.medien/an/1977/06/011.htm, as of 6 April 1998; and Berliner Morgenpost, 26 February 1998.
