William Tyler
Medieval Germany and Germanies

William Tyler - Medieval Germany and Germanies

- Welcome everyone who’s joining me today. We are now embarking on a history of Germany, and this will take us right through into the summer. As normal, Trudy will be dealing with issues like the Jewish question earlier, of course, in the Holocaust, but also either Trudy or someone else who is Jewish will be dealing with the Holocaust. I don’t mind teaching the Holocaust. I don’t want to think anyone thinks I just duck out of it, but I’m of the opinion that a Jew should be teaching it rather than a non-Jew, and I think it’s important, but I know lots of Jewish friends of mine disagree, but I feel that strongly. So that’s what’s going to happen. However, German history, certainly up to the middle of the 19th century is perhaps the most complex history of any major country in Western Europe. Much more complex in England, much more complex in France and even more complex than Spain. Thus, it’s easy to begin German history around the middle of the 19th century and to begin with, for example, the year of Revolutions, 1848, and to take the story of Germany forward from 1848. You can argue that, certainly, in the period before the 16th century, the early period of the ancient world of Rome and then of the mediaeval European world, you can largely ignore that story. And Jeremy Black, who is one of my favourite historians, in his Brief History of Germany… Most of the books I’m mentioning today are on my blog and you can find the details. Jeremy Black, in his Brief History of Germany, argues something similar and he goes as far as to say, “It’s difficult to learn lessons from this earliest period of German history.”

Now I do understand what he means but I don’t entirely agree with him. And what I’m going to try and do is to focus on some aspects of Roman Germany and of mediaeval Germany, which I believe are relevant to the later Germans of that come into being after the end of the Middle Ages. Not least because German governments or various colours and persuasions have subsequently used some of this early history as part of… Well, shall we say, a German mythology that built into what it is to be German. You know, and we talked about that before. All countries carry a mythology which is somehow built in to their history, not necessarily pure history but based upon history. But it is really telling it in such a way as to bolster whatever the government of the day, whether it’s British or German or French, wish you to believe about your country. So that’s what I’m going to try and do. Black himself, because he is focused so much on the mid 19th century onwards, begins his book with a 19th century quotation from the year 1849. That is one year after the revolutionary year in Europe and the revolutionary year of 1848 in Germany itself, which I will of course come to. And it comes from a dictionary of history and geography and social affairs, written by a Scotsman in 1849. And it goes like this. I find it very interesting that Black will begin a history of Germany with this Scottish quotation. “The word Germany is as uncertain in its derivation, we’re not sure where the word comes from,” I’ll say more about that in the moment, “as it is often vague and indefinite in its application, the extent of country comprised under the term Germany has varied in every century since it first became known to the roads. In other words, the Germany of the Kaiser and the Germany of the Nazis does not necessarily equal the Germany of today.”

And of course the Germany of post second World War is certainly not the Germany of today and mediaeval Germany… That is why Black talks about Germanies, in plural. Now in England, one is fortunate to be able to say confidently that the bulk of England was decided in Saxon England. You can draw where England was, not least because on two sides… Well, two and a half sides, it’s surrounded by sea. On the third side it’s Wales and that’s always been a very clear distinction because of language, and it’s also divided from Scotland, partly by the geography, and largely because of the political settlement. So it’s always been easy to refer to England. It’s also been relatively easy to refer to France, bordered by the sea on one side, bordered to some extent by The Alps on the other, bordered to the north by the Rhine and bordered to the south by the Pyrenees. Now although that changes, and we looked at that when we did French history, it is pretty clear what you mean when you say France, as it is pretty clear what you mean when you say England. But when you say Germany, no, it’s not clear at all. In fact, Germany has only been united, democratically, in the interwar period of the Weimar Republic. And then, since the fall of the Berlin War in 1989-1990, do we have a unified democratic Germany? So Germany is a difficult thing to get pulled off. Worse, of course, is Poland. Poland is a nightmare. It’s like trying to control jelly. It changes all the time. But Germany also changes. Now I shall use the term Germany, and if I do, I’m roughly meaning the area of Germany today, and it’s often used in that way by historians.

Otherwise lies the road of madness. Although parts of what is Germany today, for long periods of time, may have belonged to Poland, or in other words, in other times, may have belonged to France. There’s all sorts of complications along the way. But try and keep it simple. My task is to keep it simple. Now that does not mean I’m committed to dumbing it down for you. What I’m trying to do is laser focus, particularly in this early couple of lectures, laser focus on things that I believe are key historical events or key historical people or key historical ideas which are important to understand, if we are to understand later Germanies, and indeed, the Germany of the 21st century. So then, when does Germany first enter history? And the answer is with the Romans. The Romans are the people that coined the phrase Germania, Germany, Germani, the people that live in Germania. They use that title for the first time and they write about it. Germani. So who was there before them? Well, they were first of all Kelts and then other tribes that came in from the Baltic area. So it was a tribal society that the Romans first encountered. And we believe it was, according to the Roman Tacitus, who’s quite clear, but modern historians tend to reluctantly, perhaps, or carefully agree with Tacitus. But the word germania and germani was of one small tribe near to Roman , France, whom the Romans first met and then applied the term right across Germany. That, at least, is what Tacitus says. He says it’s a relatively newly coined term. And in English, we still use that term. Germany and Germans. Germania, Germani. Whereas, of course, the Germans refer to Deutschland and the French refer to Alimi. So there are differences and that, in a sense, also gives you an idea of how complex this story is. So when was that first contact to use a phrase, which I’m borrowing from later European empires. We talk about first contact. And when was first contact?

By the civilised Roman world, with the barbarians, and the Romans saw the world very much, in terms of civilization, and outside of civilization, barbarians. Beyond the wall, barbarians, in Scotland but also in Germany. So when was first contact established and why? Well, it’s the same story as Roman Britain. It is that the tribes in the north found they could barter their goods for Roman goods. Barter, not cash, bartering. And so that began, we think, around 150 BCE. In his book, the shortest… I’m sorry, all these books seem to have the same titles. This is not the brief, this is The Shortest History of Germany by James Hawes. And Hawes writes this, “We do not-” Sorry, “We do know that about 150,” and he uses the old term, BC, “the proto Germans had started interacting with the Mediterranean world. From this period, Roman made wine drinking sets start up all over Germany. We also know that shopping was a new experience for them because in all Germanic languages, the word for buying things, like kaupa, kopen, is taken straight from the Latin word caupo, which means small trader or inkeeper.” Absolutely fascinating, isn’t it? “We can imagine first contact taking place in some trading post on the Rhine or perhaps , where the proto German elite exchange first, amber, their blonde hair.” What an extraordinary thing to trade, your hair. Cut your hair off, “Now, children, come here, we’re trading tomorrow. I need to cut your hair.” Because the Romans bought blonde hair, which they did not have, in order to make blonde wigs for presumably the Marilyn Monroes of Rome. It’s quite a strange story really, to trade in hair, but they were trading in their own hair. That’s I think still a minor trade. The important trade was furs and amber, furs from the north, amber from the Baltic. And the biggest trade of all was slaves, as it was from Britain.

Slaves were sent to Rome. So that’s the first contact then, about 150 BCE. Rome never quite or, really, much at all, took the whole of what we would regard now as Germany. It really only got as far as the Rhine, establishing cities on the Rhine like Cologne and Trier, which you can visit today and see the Roman remains. In fact, the Roman Museum in Cologne is one of the best, I think, museums outside of Italy, an absolutely fantastic place. It also has a very rare thing. It has a golden wreath made to crown a victor at the games. It’s a quite beautiful intricate thing. It also has a gallery of Roman glass, which is also quite staggering in its beauty. So if you are near Cologne, yes, go to the cathedral, go to the odour Cologne shop, walk along the right, but don’t miss out the Roman Museum in Cologne. For the first time, this year, I’m visiting Trier and I’m really looking forward to a visiting Roman Trier. So the Romans really settled on a line, which was the Rhine, and the Rhine, as a line, is an important one throughout history. World War II. It’s the crossing of the Rhine, you remember in 1945. But the Romans did get as far as the , to the North of Rhine, but they were unable to hold it. So there is a toing and throwing, north of the Rhine, in terms of what the Romans can hold. They don’t ever reach northern Germany, which remains terror, incognita, an unknown land. The Romans called it, interestingly, Magna Germania, Greater Germany. Well, greater in terms of size. Today, some German historians refer to it, and you can see the connection with the modern world, they refer to Magna Germania, that part of Germany, which did not become Rome, as free Germany.

You can see how history is played with in order to create a sense of national identity. And a free Germany indicates Germany is not going to be dominated by Rome, by the south, but is quite independent. And that’s an interesting and not an unimportant point to make. The first person to advance with a Roman army, north of French Gaul, was Julius Caesar. And it’s Julius Caesar who gives us the first mentions of Germany and tells us about some of the people that he met. They tended the Romans not to make too many distinctions between those they regarded as barbarians without the law, but to clasp them all together. So we don’t get a nice anthropological breakdown of those tribal peoples living in Germany. They are simply barbarians, as far as the Romans are concerned. But one historical event in Roman Germany has entered this mythology that I’m referring to of Germans. And that is a German victory over allegiance of Rome at the battle of Teutoburg Forest, in 9 C.E, or if you prefer, 9 A.D. The battle Teutoburg Forest. And I want to read you a little piece here. In A.D 9 or C.E. 9, Publius Quinctilius Varus, the Imperial Legate in Germany, so he’s the man in charge, had led three legions, 3000 people, across the river Rhine into Germania Magni, the part of Germany, north of the Rhine, which Rome did not control in 9 C.E. Varus and his men were never to return. Slaughtered by German tribesmen in the Teutoburg Forest. They were led into a trap by the German leader called, in Latin, we have his name only in Latin, Arminius. The legions were attacked in this forest from all sides. It was an ambush. And remember that Germany was heavily forested. Germany still, in comparison to much of Europe, is heavily forested today. This is a dense, dark northern forest. And the German tribesfolk were on either side and also prepared to cut across in front and cut across behind, thus entrapping the three legions.

They must had thousands in there, although later expeditions punished the German tribes and recaptured the lost eagles. To lose an eagle, to the Romans, was something disastrous. Like losing a Napoleonic eagle was to the armies of Napoleon. Although later expeditions punished the Germans, recaptured the lost legion eagles, the slaughtered Varus and his legions led to the abandonment of any plans to transform Germania Magna into a province and saw the Rhine established as the frontier between the Roman civilised world and the German tribal world of Magna Germania. So the Rhine is important, but this victory in the Teutoburg Forest is extremely important. Now in the book that we started using, that is Jeremy Black’s Brief History of Germany, he writes this, and he looks at the 19th century, “There is an Arminius monument, south of . It is a dramatic demonstration, visible from a considerable distance of a later vision of German history, finished in 1875.” Alarm bells, flashing lights, everything. 1875 is four years after Bismarck had finally united Germany and Germany, for the first time, and the Germans begin to think of themselves as a nation. Not as barbarians, not as Prussians, but as Germans. And the Arminius monument, built in 1875, is meant to remind them that Germany isn’t a construct of Bismarck alone. But the concept that Germany goes right back in time to an independent Germany that defeated three Roman legions in 9 C.E. “It centres on a large statue of Arminius. He sawed a lot and was a celebration of the destruction of a Roman army in the Teutoburg Forest in C.E. 9. The usefulness of the past owes much to its role in identity and identification, and this was especially so for German commentators and leaders seeking to ground an idea of Germanies.” In a similar way, in England, in the 19th century, Arthur, King Arthur, becomes a big, big hero.

Also Saxon England and the use of Saxon English Christian names for members of the royal family, like Alfred, for example. But here, in Germany, in 1875, it’s really important to state that this is one nation, one folk, . And Arminius, with his hand held up high with his sword, demonstrates that it’s also a warning to other nations and EG France not to try it on in the future because Germany will defend itself. So history, I hope, those of you who followed me through a number of courses, sort of get the point I’ve been making a number of times that how we view history changes generation by generation. Just look at how when I was a child, I was taught about the British Empire to how I would teach about the British Empire today is vastly different. So it depends on time, how history is viewed. And it’s also important, if you wish to talk about… Well, shall we say democracy, for instance, I’ve just been helping my 10 year old grandson with a school project looking at Magna Carta, where both you’re, if you are American listening in, or your British or you are in a former British territory, Canada, Australia and so on. Magna Carta is the basis of how, what we could call, Anglo-American democracy is based. So if democracy is under attack, which many people believe today, that liberal democracy in the west is, then to refer back to Magna Carta, will become increasingly interesting and is bound to be had sort of pulled up a notch or two. And so it is with Arminius. Now the Roman authors, Caesar and Tacitus, in particular, talk about the warlike nature of the German tribes. Which they rather admire, rather like the British admired, for example, the Sikhs in India for being warlike.

They also did what the British did. The British recruited the Sikhs into the Indian army and the Romans brought some of the German tribes people to Rome as a guard for the emperor himself. In exactly the same way as the British and the Sikhs. Or, if you like, the British today with the Gorkha Regiment, if you go to a award ceremony in Buckingham Palace, the Gorkha will always be on duty because Victoria wanted them on duty, and they are there today. When I went to the palace for a gong, there they were, on either side of the, well, not the throne, but on either side of the chair, where the member of the royal family is sitting. So it’s no different with Rome. Empires carry lots of things that are similar, and from the past to the more modern empires. There is a slightly chilling reference, however, in Tacitus to later German history, which, I guess, that if have you’ve been learning Tacitus, wherever country you live in, if you’ve been doing Tacitus as a Latin book for translation in 1920, would never have occurred to you, but doing it now… In English, it reads, “For myself,” that is Tacitus, “I accept the view that the peoples of Germany have never contaminated themselves by intermarriage with foreigners, but remain of pure blood. Distinct and unlike any other nation. One result of this is their physical characteristics, insofar as one can generalise about such a large population are always the same.” Now, in the light of Nazi beliefs, that’s quite a frightening thing. Can we trace that belief about Germany right back then? Or is it simply that Tacitus was unable to explore the anthropology of the German tribes? Or did the German tribes themselves keep themselves apart? In England, of course, none of that happens at all. We’ve been invaded, invaded, invaded in early days and large numbers of people, subsequently, coming in as immigrants. And, of course, for America, it’s an immigrant nation.

Everyone’s coming by the indigenous first Americans. So here, Tacitus is saying something, which those of us, all of us, who understand 20th century history, are slightly fearful of. I do not know, but I will be grateful if somebody does know whether the Nazis ever used that quotation from Tacitus. I haven’t been able to trace it, but someone will say, “Ah, yes, I know.” So do let me know if you do. So we come to the end of Roman Germany. From the third century onwards, it’s the same story as in Roman Britain. There are Germanic peoples moving southwards. We, ourselves, suffer from Saxons from the north of Germany, raiding our British Roman shores. Romans set up a navy, as they did in Germany, to keep back these tribes, but it was like a flood. And in the end, the Romans could not hold the flood back, the peoples moving southwards in northern Europe. As far as Rome is concerned, this contributed hugely with the arrival of the goths in Rome itself. And so the Roman Western Empire, based on Rome, falls. They would’ve said to barbarians. Now I have somewhere a quotation, which I thought was, if I can find it very quickly, I will read it to you, if I can. I wasn’t going to read this quotation. I can’t very quickly find it. Maybe it’s in this one. One last look and then I will move on. No, I can’t quickly find it. But what it says, basically, is the Romans conquered the Germans and then the Germans conquered the Romans. But be that as it may the Roman Empire in the West Britain, France or Germania, Germany, collapses, , Hispanic, it collapses in the face of migrations from northern Europe. The whole empire in the west goes, it retreats to the Eastern empire and its capital in Constantinople. So in a sense that I put the word on my notes, “Stop,” and it is a stop. It’s a change. That’s one story. It’s often the case… Okay, I accept that you can make a case that ancient Rome continues, not least, in the Roman Catholic church, in Christianity, which the Romans brought to France, to Germany and to England.

Yes, you can make that case. But nevertheless, before Rome was a huge event in the history of Western Europe. And some historians would argue, “We tried to work our way back to that of Rome ever since, and we’ve never succeeded.” The last attempt to do so, or the present attempt to do so is the European Union. But after Rome, we enter the period that historians label the Middle Ages. And here we have one man that stands out. He is, well, I was going to say he is German, in the sense that he was probably born in Aachen, but he may have been born in , which makes him Belgium. We don’t know. But the French claiming to be a founder of the country, we know as France. When we did France, we talked about this man. The Germans see him as the founder of what is Germany. And the European Union hail him as a founder of European consciousness, post Rome. And so, for example, the European Union has a prize named after him. They have a youth prize named after him and the Council of Europe, quite different from the European Union. The Council of Europe has a tourist trail around Europe named after him. His name, Charlemagne, or translated Charles the Great. Charlemagne, Roman emperor crowned by the pope in 800 A.D., the ruler of a vast territory, including Switzerland, most of Germany, most of France, some of Spain, northern Italy. It’s a massive… And Switzerland. Massive empire. And he had the dream of reconstructing the Roman Empire. He had other copiers here in Britain, in the Midlands of Britain, in the Saxon Kingdom of Mercia, Arthur tried to unite Britain and claim to be an emperor as well. It didn’t work out for Arthur and it didn’t work out for Charlemagne either, because after Charlemagne’s death, his vast empire fragments. So this is an important story in the development of Germany, but also in the development of Europe as a whole.

This is what Simon Sebag Montefiore writes in his book, on Titans of History, about Charlemagne becoming emperor. “Pope Leo III, coronation of Charlemagne, is emperor in Rome, was one of history’s most extraordinary Christmas presents. On Christmas day 8800, Charlemagne was attending mass in St. Peter’s Basilica, in Rome, for the consagration of his son, the future Louis the Pious of France, as king of Aquitaine. As Charlemagne rose from prayer, the Pope slipped an imperial crown on his head while the Roman proclaimed him Augustus and emperor.” A pre-planned crime that the Pope had organised, “The astonished Charlemagne, who a minute before had been kneeling at the tomb of the first Pope, found himself with the current pope at his feet, adoring after the of the emperors of Old.” The Pope felt that they needed a military and political arm to the religious arm. And Charlemagne appeared to Leo as the ideal candidate. Even though we have to say, hush voice, he was barely literate. He was keen on education, but himself barely literate. Now he established his court at Aachen, where we believe he was born. If you go to Aachen today, you can see a great chair of his in the cathedral. It’s the most moving event to see, his throne. He’s such a important figure in European history. His impact on Britain is negligible so we don’t really bother about him, but we should. We should because his impact on Europe was immense. He took Christianity across the continent, he attempted to rebuild Rome, and although he didn’t succeed, because after his death, as I said, , he sewed that seed, a seed that others wished to follow. Sometimes horrendously, as in the case of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich, not everything about Charlemagne was entirely wonderful. In his book, which is History of Germany, it’s called The Traveler’s History of Germany. I’d rather puts you off, forget that.

It’s an excellent book by Robert Cole. Again, on my list. Cole writes this, he says, of Charlemagne, “Charles extended the frankish state,” that was the one that was ruling before him, “the frankish state and Roman Christianity through conquest, which sometimes meant killing thousands.” Doesn’t sound very Christian, does it? “Nor was he a devoted husband,” or maybe you think he does sound very Christian, “nor was he a devoted husband. He divorced his birth wife in favour of a second who died and was followed by two further wives. Admittedly, he remained faithful with these wives until they died, so to speak. But on the whole, concubines were a regular part of his existence and he father children with them as well as his wives. His mother,” this is a major compliment! “His mother, Bertrada, literally Bertha Bigfoot,” wonderful name’s they had, “Bertha Bigfoot may have had something to do with this. She understood that royal marriage had little to do with love and affection and everything to do with politics.” God, couldn’t Prince Harry have used Bigfoot Bertha to give him advice? But the point is Charlemagne was this big, big bigger and seen as such. It fragmented. Now the fragmentation of Charlemagne’s empire is complex in itself, but that isn’t important. What is important is the big fragmentation between what is to become France and the territory that is to be called Germany. It is that break between France and Germany, which you can say was not healed until the arrival of the common market, post 1945, although it’s your French Napoleon conquered Germany. Yes he did, but he couldn’t hold on to it. So it’s Charlemagne’s gift, as it were, to European history. It’s, first, he set up the idea of recreating Rome and secondly, of creating two big countries, France and Germany. Now we know the problems of France and Germany through the centuries. Of clashes.

And we know the importance of the river Rhine between France and Germany and the fighting on either side. It is one of the fault lines of Europe, but it is an important fault line and it doesn’t stop there. Cole writes this about his coronation, Charlemagne’s coronation, in 800. “On Christmas,” so this is a repetition of what I’ve said, but you’ll see where I’m going, “On Christmas day in the year 800, Charlemagne attended Mass St. Peter’s in Rome dressed as a Roman Patricia. Pope Leo III sat on the bishop’s throne, the gospel was read in Charles’ prayer, high oath. Leo went to him, placed the crown of the Caesars on his head and bowed before him. The congregation shouted, ‘to Charles Augusta’s crown by God. The great and peace giving emperor be life and victory!’” And that marks a further change in German and European history. For the next sentence, that Cole writes, says, “Thus was born the Holy Roman Empire.” Now post Charlemagne, France goes on in a difficult way to become one country. We followed that story when we looked at France. France became one country. From that moment on, well, at least a fight to create one country. When it controlled big areas that tried to be separate, like Normandy and Britain and so. But France does come together and there’s a French king. Germany doesn’t. Germany is formed of massive number of states and statelets, and bishop pricks and archbishop pricks and free towns. It’s a complete, well, you might say, mess.

But only a mess if you think in English and French terms about a centralised monarchy. Now, Charlemagne’s reign and monarchy was a centralised monarchy in the same way as Saxon and Norman England was a centralised monarchy. But Germany becomes a patch rock of separate states and separate statements. And although some of those bind together in larger entities, it isn’t until 1871 in Bismarck, that Germany is finally united. What happened in Germany was the so-called Holy Roman Empire, which the later French writer, Voltaire, tells us was neither holy, Roman nor an empire. And it’s true, it wasn’t particularly holy, it was a Christian empire but hardly holy. It certainly was nothing to do with Rome. And as an empire was different. Empires, think British, think French, in the 19th century, think Russian from, well, really from the 16th century or certainly 17th century onwards are territorial empires ruled from a centre. Either in one contiguous land mass like Russia, from Moscow in St. Petersburg or scattered across the globe and ruled from places like London and Paris. The Holy Roman empire was different. All these states and statements were independent, but they owed certain duties to the emperor, not to something called Germany or the Holy Roman Empire. They owed it simply to the man who’d been elected to be the emperor. You remember that the House of Hanover that came to Royal Britain in 1714, it was the elector of Hanover, elector because he was one of the electors of the Holy Roman Empire. Now, later, the Holy Roman empire becomes a personal fiefdom of the Austrian house of Habsburg, but at the beginning it was elected.

“Oh, they had an election for the head of the house of Habsburg,” but it was a phoney election later. The point is that Germany is not one country. It is part of the Holy Roman Empire. The Holy Roman Empire is not an empire based on land, but are based upon the person of the emperor to whom independent cities, states and statelets owe duties. The one unifying, well, one of the unifying factors, but not everywhere, is the ethnicity of German in Switzerland, but then not all Switzerland was German, in Austria, in Germany, in Poland, but of course not all of Poland was German speaking, and the Holy Roman Empire didn’t ever conquer the whole nor in Italy where German wasn’t, and Italian… But it’s basically the bulk of the people are German and the Holy Roman Empire staggers on into the modern age until Napoleon gets rid of it in 1806, by which time it’s pretty dead as an organisation. Interestingly enough, after the defeat of the Napoleon in 1814-1815, it is transformed into the Austrian Empire in Vienna and finally into the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and that continues until the end of the first war in 1918. And remember, one of the issues with the Austro-Hungarian Empire is that they were unable to break away from this mediaeval idea of the emperor in Vienna with different groups, the Czechs, the Serbs or whatever it is owing their allegiance to the person of the emperor and not to something called Austria or not to something called Hungary. You all know that, I’m sure, but it emerges from the Holy Roman Empire.

So there’s no story of Germany as such until Napoleon starts playing around the map of Europe after his victory at 1806 at Jena. J-E-N-A. And then after the revolution of 1848. For our purposes, France becomes a Moose Awards one country, following the death of Charlemagne in 814. But Germany does not become Germany. It is. You can draw it on a map and it’s full of states and statelets who are members of what becomes known as the Holy Roman Empire. The Germans regarded the Holy Roman Empire as the first Reich, the Kaiserian Empire as the Second Reich, from 1871 to 1918. And the third Reich, of course, is Nazi Germany. Post 1945, neither the Germans nor the Austrians are happy using the term Reich and the Austrians are not keen to refer back to the Holy Roman Empire, whereas the Germans seem to be more willing to look back on the Holy Roman Empire. So what have we got so far? We’ve got that Germany is not one country, but a variety of states and those states belong to an even greater entity called the Holy Roman Empire. And that lasts, roughly, a thousand years to 1806. But Germany, I mean the trick question is, for kids at A level is, when did Germany begin? Answer, 1871. That, of course, is nonsense, but in one technical term, that’s true. Now, before we finish today, I want to turn to a trading empire based on Lubeck, in Germany, and a military order based on, at least for a lot of its time on Colesburg. Now incorporated as within Russia. First of all, the economic empire called the Hanseatic League or the Hansa. Neil McGregor, in his excellent book, Germany: Memories of a Nation, which is very hidden but brilliant. McGregor is a brilliant scholar. He writes this about this Hansa Empire, “One of the most enduring commercial networks ever established.”

One of the most enduring networks ever established. And many therefore see the Hansa as a precursor of the European Union of the 21st century. It was a organisation comprised of cities in northern Germany and the Baltic, and then, further afield, in England. If you visit England or you live in England, then you can see a blue plaque on the wall near Cannon Street Station in the city of London because Cannon Street Station was built over what was called the steel yard. The steel yard is the yard, in the Middle ages, on which you weighed things. It was called the steel yard. It was German territory in the middle of the city of London, exempt from English euros. And you can see, also, if you walk near Cannon Street Station today, “steel yard passage,” there is the steel yard. If you want to see evidence, you have to go to only one place. It is physical evidence of Hansa in England, and that is in the county of Norfolk, in the town of King’s Lynn, near where the king has a home at . King’s Lynn has a warehouse, and I have to tell you, it is extremely interesting to visit because you are really in touch then, in England, with the Hansa. Of course, the Hansa, as I said, went through other town in North York. You can visit Bergen in Norway and maybe some of you have on a cruise and there, the whole of one side of the key still are the houses, warehouses, one of the housing and museum of the Hansa. They also reached Riga, of course, in Latvia, and Stockholm, in Sweden, but it was overwhelmingly a German movement fixed on Lubeck, and then two further great towns emerge, Hamburg and Bremen. And these cities were free cities, they weren’t controlled by a state or statelet.

And even today, Bremen and Hamburg are technically free cities within the German Republic, even today. And today, King’s Lynn has joined a new group, a entirely 21st century group of Hanseatic towns which do trade together. So I mean, King’s Lynn, Hall, Glasgow, they’re putting two fingers up, to the EU, if you like. I have a view about the European Union, which those of you who are British and have heard me say before and my war stick with me saying it. But one of my views about the European Union is that long term it’s not stable enough, unless it is to split into a federal setup. And the north needs to have its own base. A Britain, Polish, German led Northern European Union, including the Netherlands and the Scandinavian and Baltic countries, as a viable trading unit. In other words, it’s largely redesigning the old Hanseatic League for today. And that would work. I don’t think carrying Southern Europe or carrying Eastern Europe is particularly good news to the economics of Northern Europe. Had such a structure existed, then I don’t think Britain would ever have left the European Union. That is a personal view, which I don’t suppose that any of you know agrees with. But I need to say it, I need to get you off my chest to say it. But it’s an interesting thought, even if you fundamentally disagree with it. The Hansa became such an important organisation. It back, for example, King Edward IV, in England, with cash to fight the Wars of the Roses, it lent money out at interest, of course. It’s an extraordinary institution because it wasn’t a state-run institution. King’s Lynn didn’t have to do anything with the government in London, with its role as a Hansa town, and in Germany, without a central government. They were free cities and did their own thing.

Quite an extraordinary development in northern mediaeval Europe. And that’s important to remember, in a way that I’m talking about in terms of the EU, but also in terms of the economic clout of Germany, even in the Middle Ages. Economic clout of Germany is something we’re very familiar with, all the way through history and here it is. It is a clear example, in the Middle Ages. Why did it fail then? Well, it failed because the British, the French, the Dutch and the Spanish and the Portuguese went westwards, across the Atlantic to the New World and southwards to Asia. And we no longer traded in the Baltic to the extent that we did before. Now that’s the argument in Britain of those who wanted out of Europe, on the grounds that we could trade more freely with Asia and with America, and in particular with Asia up-and-coming economies, then we wanted to be linked to what many in Britain regard as inevitably a failing economy within Europe. Now, two lots of opinions, vastly different over that issue, but the Hansa declined to nothing by the early 17th century, first decade of the 17th century, only 14 towns remain, and cities, in the Hansa, when previously it was a massive organisation. Now my final subject is military, the Teutonic Knights. Now the Tectonic Knights were a German version of the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller, one of the three great orders. You were both a monk and a knight. It’s the army of God made literal. And they were formed, at the time, of the Third Crusade, in 1189 to 1192. And they fought in the Holy Land, in Palestine.

They had their headquarters at a fort called the Montfort, outside of Acre. And they were very similar to templars and hospitallers. But when Acre fell to Islam in 1291, although those three great orders of Monk Knight had to leave, the templars and the hospitallers went to Cyprus first. Later, of course, hospitallers go to mortar and the templars are disbanded by the Pope. But the Teutonic Knights went first to Venice and they had a crisis of conscience. They didn’t know what they were for anymore. Well, the hospitallers went on fighting Islam, from Cyprus, and took from Malta, The Great Siege of Malta, in the 16th century, Malta defended, as a gateway into York, defended successfully by the Knights Hospitallers. The templars, well… It’s very difficult to say what the temples were about. They were about themselves acquiring large amounts of European land, vast amounts of money and acting really as the diplomats and bankers for whole countries. The French bank or the French Monarchs cash was in the temple in Paris, as the English King’s Cash was in the temple in London. Those of you who know Britain, the temple is now where the lawyers are. But the Temple Church, which you can visit, exists the day, although badly bombed in the war, is being rebuilt. You can visit the Temple Church. But the Tectonic Knights didn’t have an aim, didn’t have a purpose. Now, I dunno if you’ve ever worked for a firm that suddenly found that whatever it produced was no longer wanted. Both my family’s businesses went out of fashion. One because we produced leather for shoes and we couldn’t compete with plastic, couldn’t compete with cheaper countries.

And the other produced steam engines. Well, we all know what happened to steam engines, and they talked about what they would do. Certainly, the part of my family built steam engines, talked about could they change into diesel engines, and they made some attempts, not very successfully, I have to say. And they . But the Teutonic Knights, they thought about it and decided they would fight the barbarians in Europe. The barbarians were the Slavs/Russians. They also fought against the Lithuanian Polish Confederacy. But you get here that division between Teutons/German and Slav/Russian, which is alive and kicking today when Putin is making statements about Nazi Germany is on the march once more by sending tanks to Ukraine and all of that nonsense. But the division is a real division. Is a real division. Wow. So the Teutonic Knights reinvent themselves in Europe and they base themselves in various parts of Europe. If you visit Poland, you can visit The Great Teutonic Castle at what is called Malbork today, in Poland. Originally, it’s German name, Marienburg. If you visit Russia and the enclave of Russia, which is Kaliningrad, but was Konigsberg, there also was the headquarters of the Teutonic Knights. And it’s that that is important. So what has this got to do with the Germany of today? Well, the Germany of today, it’s an extraordinary link. They were a Catholic- Obviously they were Catholic order. But when Lutheranism came, in the early 16th century, to Germany, the Grand Master of the Order, a man called Albert, from Prussia, converted to Protestantism to Lutheranism, as did the majority of his knights. Others remain Catholic. The Grand Master said to Luther, we are told, “What do I do?”

And he said, “Well, declare yourself a secular ruler.” And Albert did that in part of what became Prussia and he ruled that area as Duke of Prussia, and he ruled it on a hereditary basis. And the protestant Teutonic Knights followed him, and his full name was Albert Hohenzollern. And the Hohenzollerns ruled Prussia. Right way through to 1871, at which point, Wilhelm of Prussia becomes Wilhelm I of Germany, and the Hohenzollerns ruled Germany until the monarchy is abolished in 1918. The point to remember is that Prussia origin lies in a military organisation, and the military organisation of Prussia dominates the unification of Germany. You can say it’s down to Bismarck, but it’s also down to Protestantism, it’s also down to Russian-Prussian arms. It was Prussia that defeated France in 1870 that created the opportunity for Bismarck to make the final move to create Wilhelm of Prussia, to be Wilhelm, Emperor of Germany. And so that link to the Middle Ages, I think, is important. You can always disagree. Next week, return to part of the story that I begun to tell there. Part of next week, we will tell the story of Martin Luther’s Protestantism, which divides Germany in two, in broad terms, the Protestant North, dominated by Prussia, and the Catholic South, dominated by Bavaria. And that has big implications to German history and continues to have.

One last story. I had a friend, German friend, who was in charge of adult education in , and she could give monies out to various organisations, and when she had a cut in her budget, I rang her up because I was having cuts in England and I said, “What are you doing right here about your cuts? Because I’ve been reading about cuts in Germany and I’ve got problems,” I said, “here, in Britain.” And she said, “Oh, I don’t.” And I said, “What do you mean you don’t? You’ve got cuts?” “Oh yes, I’ve got cuts. Quite big cuts,” she said. Now she worked in because her parents fled East Germany. They were Prussian and true Prussian she was, she said, “It’s easy, William. I simply cut the to the Catholics.” I’ll leave you with that story. I’m sure I’ve got lots of questions and comments… And yeah, I have. Should I start on those?

Q&A and Comments:

Actually… No, I tell you why I put this on. I’ve been through so many jerseys today, dropping things on them. I think it’ll drive my wife mad if I wore another jersey.

Well, the Romans chose Germania, as I said, because one of the tribes they came across, on the frontier of Germany and France, they would’ve been some version, in a local language, of the word Germana. That is what Tacitus tells us. They use that name. As for Britannia, it was an older name, applied to the island by the Greeks, who came to , which was Prettanike. And Britannia came out of Prettanike. The Romans, of course, put Britannia on coins, minted in London during the time of Rome Britain.

No, Martin, I am not going for a job interview. How dare you. I’m not. I’m being damn size smart if I was going for a job interview. Job interviews are of the past for you and I, Martin.

Oh, Inna, what a wonderful- In Russian, the Germans are called, forgive my pronunciation, nemtsy, which means mute, dumb, not able to speak. Well, there you are, you see? These divisions exist with language. I’ll just get rid of that in a moment. My college in London was a big centre for deaf education for adults and my head of centre taught me once, when I first went, as 1980s, the symbol for Germans was that, in British Sign Language. In other words, the helmet with the spike. I have to say, I’m pleased to say, that that’s all disappeared now in British Sign Language and it doesn’t carry those appalling racist connections, but it does. The only other thing, but as I’m talking about it, you might- This has always intrigued me, the sign for sugar in British Sign Language, American Sign Language, Canadian, it’s different. But in British Sign Language it’s this.

And it came from the docks in Liverpool, where sugar was unloaded from the Caribbean and it was the worst loads that the workman, the dockers, had to handle because it got on your skin and you itched like mad. So if they did this, you know that there was a sugar and it went into British Sign Language, that meant sugar. I think it still does. Let me go, I’ve gone off piece as it were, but I thought- I’m interested in that, no one else is.

Q: Where did the slaves, which they barter traded, come from?

A: From other tribes that they were waring against and further north.

No problem at all. Same here. Many of them, we had came from other parts of distant parts of Britain.

Oh, Serena, you have a certain twisted mind. When you first said trading their blonde hair before you explain blonde hair for wigs, I thought you meant sharing their DNA or interbreeding. Well, and certainly interbreeding happened. It certainly happened in Britain and my knowledge of Roman Germany is less than it is in Roman Britain, for obvious reasons. But in Roman Britain we have Roman gravestones, as it were, which indicate that the husband was not necessarily Roman, but a Roman soldier from anywhere in the empire and the wife was British.

You are absolutely right, Jackie. Arminius in German is known as Hermann. Whether he was known as Hermann at the time, I don’t know, maybe. Has a huge pedal store in his name and he was known as Hermann the German by British soldiers stationed there.

Yes, there’s all sorts of re- The reference to Germans by British soldiers as Huns, in the First World War, also comes from this ancient period.

Oh, the name of the forest is Teutoburg Forest. T-E-U-T-O-B… Let me make sure I do it too correctly. It’s usually B-O-R-G-E-R, but sometimes the battle is Teutoburg Forest. The spelling is slightly different. Even in the 21st century, the forestation of Germany is still about 30%. It’s an extraordinary forested country. Silver country, I think, is what they would have to say. Now, when somebody’s put the, I know you are also wonderfully good at answering questions. I would suggest that the Nazis held they common ideas about the superiority germination and no need to test us. You are right, of course. But I’m interested when, because the Nazis did harp back to the past, whether they used testers. I have no- I’ve never come across a reference and I may just be chasing shadows. There’s somebody else. Yes, here we go.

Q: Was it a natural disaster that caused the migration of tribes?

A: No, it was, I think, population, changing climate and it’s wanting to get south trade and to- Well, rape and pillage the Roman Empire. I’ll go on to the story of Bosch in due course when we get to World War I and the French. The Hans are one of those tribes from the third century onwards that’s moving southwards.

Oh, somebody’s answered your question anyhow, and I wanted to leave that until I- It doesn’t matter. I was going to tell you’ve sported one of my moments of the First World War. It’s from Carl Bosch, your .

Oh, wow! Jeff, “We visited Big Foot Bertha and Pepin the Short’s tombs at St. Denis this afternoon.” How wonderful! Oh, how wonderful.

And somebody’s kindly- Rita has put up my blog, if people want to look, I wrote a small piece about this period, a page or so of typing and I put up a first bash at some books on Germany. I put up all the general ones. I should put up more books next week. I put up books about Charlemagne. I put up books about Teutonic Knights… Charlemagne, Teutonic and the Hansa I put on, as well, and wrote, as well as general history books.

Oh, Judy, you wrote an essay on Charlemagne in 18- I’m sorry, 1962. And remembered that he- Sorry, I’m sorry. I’m in one of those moods today, I’ll have to take a tablet, I think. I wrote a high school essay on Charlemagne in 1962, and remember that he distinguished himself by placing the crown on his own head. No… No, he didn’t. The pope placed it on his head and he was surprised at it. The Frenchman who put a crown on his own head was Napoleon. And I think you may be, not Charlemagne, definitely not Charlemagne, because there is a view that he knew it was going to happen. But another view is that he didn’t, it was the Pope that did it.

Right, Catherine. Absolutely on the board.

Paula says, “I’ve just found this from Harvard Gazette.” Yes, you are right. It’s Christopher Krebs from Stanford. Oh, he draws a connection from Tacitus Nazi ideology and says, “In 1936, at a Nazi party convention, you remember there was a Germanic room with the walls covered in quotes by Tacitus.” And a book by Krebs, A Most Dangerous Book, it’s called, Tacitus’s Germania from the Roman Empire to the Third Reich. Which, Paula, I’m sorry, I had never heard of, and I’m not sure whether it was ever published in this country. Krebs, as you write, you say, was a prof at Stanford, a classicist.

How interesting. So I am justified in what I said. Well, he is a really a top-brand classicistic historian so I’m totally justified. That is really smashing, Paula, you found that. Particularly as we’re still talking about it. When I was at a French school, we learned Charlemagne was very disciplined and had 8,000 candles made to time is death. Absolutely. Eight hours sleep, eight hours sporting, eight hours government business.

Another myth? I’m not sure that it is. Alfred the Great, here, slightly later, also had a candle to tell the time of day.

Q: Was there any religious significance, the second coming for the Pope making Charlemagne an emperor?

A: No, it was to do with… No, I don’t think so. There was a view that he was going to be, there was an odd Christian view that he will be the last emperor before the second coming, but that is post his coronation.

Memories of a Nation, Rita, you are doing well for me tonight, by Neil McGregor, who was head of the British Museum.

Q: Ariene. Arlene, sorry, I beg your pardon. Arlene, was Germany before 1871 considered a confederation?

A: The word confederation does come in to the German story with Napoleon and subsequently, but it’s not the whole of Germany. I’ll talk about the confederation when I get there. It’s not the whole of Germany, that would be untrue. But it is a part of the story of Germany in the 19th century.

Hans says, “A Northern League of Italy agrees with you.” The fascist league in the north. Nanette says… Oh, well, thanks. “Schools don’t cover it.” No, they don’t. Particularly if they’re in the anglosphere, as we might say, Anglo-American schools. No, we don’t. As I said, we look into Germany only if you did a level of history in America or Britain, I guess you probably started Germany in 1848. Certainly I did. I’d done Luther, but then I went to a Christian school. Luther was worshipped in a sense. Oh, same.

Q: How did they get round the religion against charging interest?

A: No, they don’t charge interest. . They merely give administrative charges. But by the time of the 15th century, the Christian Church has really given up because the Italian cities are dealing in with interest. It’s in the early Middle Ages, where the Christian prohibition against interest is at its height, which leads to the opportunities for Jewish financiers to take, or Jewish bankers, to take that niche wrong. But by the time we get to the 15th century, 14th century, the prohibitions have gone. If you were asked then the answer is… It’s like the bank’s charges now for management administrative purposes. It just so happens to be the same rate as where Jews were charging as interest so… Instantly, by Jews, although I said truly we’ll talk about it, the Jews entered Germany, definitely, at the time of the Roman Empire, and it is said they came directly, well, I dunno how directly that means, from Palestine. So there were Jews in Germany, at the time of the Romans. Lots of arguments about Britain and Jew or England and Jews in Roman times. Basically not. England had Jews with the Norman Conquest in 1066.

Jackie says, “Your idea of a new Hanseatic league is not new. I recall a TV debate several years ago and someone said, ‘Why should a successful Norwegian fisherman subsidise unsuccessful Greek tomato farmer?’” That, of course, is the core argument for many when Britain left the EU. The figure, I don’t want to get into a round with other Britains, but some of the figures rather indicate that we are worse off, economically at least, from withdrawing from the EU. Whether that’s going to be a long-term or short-term thing. It certainly is at the moment.

Oh, and, Paula, interesting. Hansa is the name of the German airline, Luft Hansa. I’m really sorry. I meant to say that and I don’t necessarily keep to what I’ve written and I went off piece and once or twice I should have said that. You’re absolutely right, and that’s a great link to the past.

“One of the reasons the Hanseatic League,” says Diane, “is it became too protectionist, like the European Union.” Yeah, there is truth in that. The wider issue is the opening up of the Atlantic, but I’m not going to argue with that view either.

Yes, Elizabeth I had an important role in curtailing influence of private Hanseatic. She felt that this would benefit Britain and was right. Yes, she was. But Elizabeth I was always right. I’m a huge fan. As I go through the Purdy Gates and some.

Q: Peter says, “Is there anyone you’d like to meet?”

A: I would love to meet Elizabeth. She’d eat me alive, but nevertheless, it would be worth it. And you are absolutely right. She withdrew because she realised, remember she financed Drake’s expedition. She’s looking abroad, Virginia, the Virgin Queen, she’s looking towards the new world. And she’s looking towards Asia, the East India company. Although true, she set up the Levant company with the Middle East and set up the Muscovy company, all about the same time happened. Yes.

No, Poland would definitely be considered to be in Northern Europe. Definitely. If Poland can, somehow, become more democratic than it is at the moment. You could say that it has a foot in the north and a foot in the East, but I think it makes sense for Poland. I think it makes sense for Poland. And that’s an interesting question. I would have to take a lot. Yes, the Teutonic Knight figure in a film like Alexander Nevsky. Absolutely right.

David says, “Etymology of deut from a word, meaning of the people. If my memory serves , cognate dear, as in dear to worms.” It’s also, of course, in the past. It’s also used in the Netherlands. It’s the same word as Dutch, and you have to be rather careful reading old English literature. And when they say Dutch, do they mean the Dutch or do they mean the German? You have to be just aware of that. Henri Pirenne’s book, Charlemagne and Mohammed, which I haven’t read, there is a suggestion that Charlemagne went to Jerusalem, but I think total myth.

Augustus had nightmares about the Teutoburg Forest and called out, “Give me back my legions.” Oh, and then you put it. Oh, , I love you. You put it in Latin. . Oh, that’s fantastic.

Well, Judy, you say Britain was named after the Roman, Britannicas, who was much loved by the Romans, but died before he became emp- I think it’s the other way round, but the general opinion is that it comes from the Greek.

Ah, now… There is an interesting book in the Osprey series, which is on my book list, Leonard and Alfred, which is called The Hanseatic Armed Forces. They created their own forces, but they also employed mercenaries. They’ve got money. Not so much, I think, the political states in which they were embedded, but I may well be wrong on that. Yes, Boston was important.

No, I only- Sorry. I only quoted King’s Lynn for the simple reason that you can see it at King’s Lynn. You can’t see anything in Boston, in Lincolnshire, but you are absolutely right. And, of course, it’s these eastern ports which trade with the Hansa, and you are 100% correct. It’s the fact that you can see it in King’s Lynn. And in fact, the building was bought and there was a 18th century beautiful house created, and that bit of the warehouse was not- In recent years, they’ve opened that bit as well. So I think there’s more to see when the last time I went to King’s Lynn.

Yes, the Germans did practise eugenics in southwest Africa. That’s absolutely right, Barbara. It was a pre-run of Nazism. And that’s another horrendous story, is German southwest Africa.

Oh, Leonard. How clever. I bound to your linguistic. I’m not a linguist. Linguistically, the initial G frequently becomes aspirated becoming H, as in Hermann, and the aspirated H often disappears, leaving just the A, as in Arminius. Wow. Oh, sorry. I’d said Leonard, Alfred, because the email says Leonard and Alfred. But after the comment, it’s brackets Alfred. Sorry, Leonard, you’re out of favour. Alfred is in favour. Thank you for that. That’s really helpful.

Q: Can you cover the Livonian monks who destroyed pre-Christian indigenous Baltic religion?

A: No, I can’t, I’m sorry. Not on a course on Germany. You understand I have an hour and I can’t stop and go outside of Germany and all of that. No, I have to keep on the main themes and next week the main theme is, I can’t remember what I said. I will know by next week what I’m doing, but it starts with Luther, which is important. , I’m not going down the line of Paul Johnson.

I think I’ve come to the end of the questions. Can I thank everyone? Not only for asking the questions, but in many places other people supplying the answers. Thanks. And in the very interesting comments that people make, I’ve always said, in adult education, the tutor learns quite as much as the students. As we go through German history, many of you have German backgrounds, I’m sure, and will be able to input all sorts of pieces of information, which I don’t know or even get wrong. So please do go on doing that. It enhances the experience for everyone. I am always sorry when we have a meeting like this and everyone has been so interesting that we aren’t actually meeting in person, in flesh. And maybe meeting in flesh might be a good idea, but I don’t know. Maybe one day we can meet, I don’t know, mid-Atlantic on a cruise. Perhaps we can hire one of the huge cruise liners that and we can have a small cruise liner come from Canada and America and a small cruise liner come from Europe and we’re mid-Atlantic. A sort of Roosevelt-Churchill meeting, except ours will be educated. Wouldn’t that be fantastic? Anyhow, for now, I’m going to go and have my dinner and some of you haven’t had breakfast, but thank you for listening. I’ll be back. Same time, same place, next week.