By Giles E. Ockenden
In recent years, the Monarchy has returned to public focus in Germany. In December 2022, several members of the far-right Reichsbürger movement were arrested for planning a coup d’état, including Heinrich XIII Prinz Reuss, a descendant of Mecklenburg royalty.[1] In mid-2019, it emerged that Georg Friedrich, head of the Hohenzollern house which had ruled Prussia as kings and later the German Empire as Emperors, had filed a variety of property claims with the German government. These revelations caused public debate, with many questioning their validity as Crown Prince Wilhelm’s involvement with the Nazi movement became public knowledge.[2]
Interestingly, the debate over the Hohenzollerns’ claims today strongly resembles public outcry and a referendum on royal property claims from 1926. Following the revolution in 1918, the German monarchies had all collapsed and were replaced by a parliamentary republic. In the years that followed, the German states established settlements with their ruling houses, separating the property of the state and the property of the former royal families.[3] In the negotiations for these settlements, the former royal houses attempted to claim as much of what they had enjoyed as rulers as their own private property. However, in late 1925 details were leaked of a decidedly generous settlement with the Hohenzollerns, the former rulers of Prussia and emperors of the German Empire, prompting public outrage. The KPD, the German Communist Party, launched an initiative for a referendum on full expropriation of the former ruling houses without compensation. This initiative gained public support and eventually the reluctant backing of the Social Democratic party’s leadership. Consequently, a referendum on the full expropriation of the former ruling houses without compensation was set for 20th June 1926.[4]
This KPD poster from the referendum campaign from the Deutsches Historisches Museum highlights the depth of anti-Monarchist resentment in 1926.[5] The poster, titled ‘Decision on June 20th’, depicts the last German emperor, Wilhelm II, alongside a disabled war veteran. Underneath Wilhelm, the text reads “Wilhelm II. in Doorn receives a daily pension of 1,670 Reichsmark. They [the Hohenzollerns] all have enough for good living.” Underneath the veteran, the text reads “[to] A 100% war-disabled person 2.35 Reichsmark per day. What do the others have? Lost everything. Everything expropriated.” The poster concludes “Therefore go and vote. Vote for “yes” and make an X in the yes-box”.
This poster is not just a campaigning tool but reflects genuine, seething resentment of the former royals. This is evident in the obscene wealth inequalities between the former Emperor and the veteran, which convey what was perceived as the insulting absurdity and greediness of the former rulers’ compensation claims. Wilhelm wears a sign claiming he is ‘totally bankrupt’ whilst begging with a priceless imperial gown coloured red to depict his material wealth. By contrast, the poster vividly depicts ordinary Germans’ plight through a contrastingly fully grey, disabled veteran. The veteran’s uniform highlights he has no other clothes, and is therefore poor, whilst also reminding the viewer of their own suffering during the war. It should be remembered that after suffering from wartime starvation and hyperinflation, the German economy was struggling in 1926, and millions were again unemployed and hungry.[6] By contrast, the former monarchs, especially Wilhelm II., had all received generous settlements and subsidies from post-war governments, remaining wealthy.[7] It is of further note, posters of the more moderate Social Democratic Party did not deploy imagery that was any less emotive. The example below, for instance, depicts the royals milking a cow (Germany) dry, while ordinary Germans receive water (starvation) instead:[8]
Despite such strong sentiments, the referendum failed on a legal technicality when less than 20 million of the required votes were received. However, of those who had voted, an astonishing 36.4% of the electorate had voted to completely expropriate the former monarchs without compensation. These voters were not just communists or left-wing extremists, but moderate left-wing, centrist, and even right-wing voters. Additionally, conservatives ran a successful intimidation campaign against voters in rural areas, threatening workers’ livelihoods and telling their own voters to ‘stay home’, allowing for easy identification of ‘yes’ voters. The monarchs had therefore completely lost their appeal with almost half of German voters, a figure which may well have been higher were it not for the right’s intimidation campaign and administrative hinderances.[9] More importantly, these posters, along with the referendum results, indicate that many Germans resented the monarchy greatly. In exile in Holland, Wilhelm received the referendum’s failure with excitement, viewing it as a statement of monarchism.[10] Clearly, he was wrong.
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/heinrich-xiii-prince-reuss-who-is-ringleader-of-german-far-right-coup-plot-and-what-is-the-reichsburger-movement-12763580; https://www.dw.com/en/heinrich-xiii-germanys-far-right-prince-who-planned-a-coup/a-64031542
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/12/arts/design/german-royals-property-claim.html; https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/the-fall-of-the-house-of-hohenzollern-1.3956448; https://www.tagesspiegel.de/potsdam/brandenburg/showdown-im-hohenzollern-streit-verwaltungsgericht-verhandelt-am-13-juni-9175644.html
[3] Rainer Stentzel, ‘Zum Verhältnis von Recht und Politik in der Weimarer Republik: Der Streit um die sogenannte Fürstenenteignung’, in Der Staat 39:2 (2000), pp. 276-277
[4] Franklin C. West, A Crisis of the Weimar Republic: The German Referendum of 20 June 1926 (Philadelphia, 1985), pp. 44-186, 236
[5] Deutsches Historisches Museum DG 90/9211, ‘Illustriertes Propagandaflugblatt zur Volksabstimmung für die Fürstenenteignung’
[6] Richard J. Evans, The Coming of the Third Reich (London, 2003), pp. 108-110, 112, 114;
[7] John C.G. Röhl (trans. Sheila de Bellaigue and Roy Bridge), Kaiser Wilhelm II: Into the Abyss of War and Exile (Cambridge, 2013), pp. 1189-1192; West, A Crisis of the Weimar Republic, pp. 20-40 ; ‘Ex-Kaiser’s Marriage’, The Times 3rd November 1922 (Issue 43179), p. 13; ‘Ex-Kaiser’s Marriage’, The Times 4th November 1922 (Issue 43180), p. 9; ‘Ex-Kaiser Keeps Show of Old Days’, New York Times 19th November 1922 (No. 24771), p. 1
[8] Deutsches Historisches Museum Do 57/1318.19, ‘Aufruf der SPD zur Teilnahme am Volksbegehren zur Fürstenenteignung 1926’
[9] Bernhard Fulda, Press and Politics in the Weimar Republic (Oxford, 2009), pp. 123-124; West, A Crisis of the Weimar Republic, pp. 185, 246-247
[10] West, A Crisis of the Weimar Republic, p. 274
Featured image: Deutsches Historisches Museum Do 57/1318.19, ‘Aufruf der SPD zur Teilnahme am Volksbegehren zur Fürstenenteignung 1926’
First Image: Deutsches Historisches Museum DG 90/9211, ‘Illustriertes Propagandaflugblatt zur Volksabstimmung für die Fürstenenteignung’
Doing History in Public 