I've forgotten what this means????

[Mike Dwyer]

A few days ago, either on this forum or one of the others I visit, someone posted a color plate involving uniform details of Landwehr officers.

I noticed the plate refers to Offiziere a. D. and Offiziere z. D. I think I used to know what that means, but my little brain just isn't coming up with the answer. Would someone be kind enough to explain it to me again?

[David Müldner]

a.D. would mean ausse Dienst, z.D. zur disposition

A few days ago, either on this forum or one of the others I visit, someone posted a color plate involving uniform details of Landwehr officers.

I noticed the plate refers to Offiziere a. D. and Offiziere z. D. I think I used to know what that means, but my little brain just isn't coming up with the answer. Would someone be kind enough to explain it to me again?

[Mike Dwyer]

a.D. would mean ausse Dienst, z.D. zur disposition

David,

Thanks for the full language. According to a book I have the zur Disposition meant that the officer, after 18 years of service, requested to retire and be placed z.D. and was subject to immediate recall in the event of mobilization, military law, and could wear the uniform.

Unfortunately, the same book doesn't mention a.D. Could you explain that in a little more detail please.

Thank you!

[Gerd Becker]

Mike,

Ausser Dienst means, they are retired.

best,
Gerd

[joerookery]

mobilization, military law, and could wear the uniform

Mike,
I have found the entire topic very interesting. Retired to the German Imperial Army did not necessarily mean what it means today in the USA. There was a big effort to keep retired officers under the thumb of the army.

This constitutional question was never brought to a head. There was one major test case where the army won.[i] The case revolves around a military commentator, who was retired. Was he subject to civil court or the honor court? There were two separate court systems; the civil courts (controlled by the Minister of Justice who was responsive to the Reichstag), and the honor court (influenced by the Minister of War and made up of officers of the Regiment). Military officers, according to the army were supposed to take their grievances to an honor court in cases where the two antagonists were of honorable status. The decision of the honor court made up of other officers was held binding and primary to any decision in a civil court. The constitutional thought, was that military officers were not liable and their problems would be worked out in the honor court. Officers were duty bound to shake hands and try to work things out. If that did not work the honor court would try to settle it nonviolently. If that did not work, the final method to restore one's honor was a duel. Officers subject to the code of honor were fully expected to duel. An unwillingness to duel would show one's hand as not being of the correct reliability. In general, anyone refusing to duel would be drummed out of the army. This punishment or correction was used widely. Decisions by the honor court were final, subject to the approval of the Kaiser.




<HR align=left width="33%" SIZE=1>[i] Kitchen, Martin, The German Officer Corps 1890-1914, Clarendon Press, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><ST1lace w:st="on">Oxford</ST1lace></st1:City>, 1968, pg 63

[Mike Dwyer]

Mike,
I have found the entire topic very interesting. Retired to the German Imperial Army did not necessarily mean what it means today in the USA. There was a big effort to keep retired officers under the thumb of the army.

Joe,

So was an a.D. officer fully retired, not subject to recall and not eligible to wear the uniform? It would seem they weren't since the uniform plate I mentioned shows rank insignia and uniform accoutraments for both z.D. and a.D. officers.

[joerookery]

Mike

The Officer in question was Oberst Gädke, a retired colonel a.d, who had commanded a Field Artillery Regiment The objective in the honor court case was the use of the title and the right to wear the uniform. Gädke used his title of Oberst and wrote some things that caught the ire of the Kaiser. This guy was a popular columnist, and it was a big fight. The claim of the military was that he was still under their jurisdiction and would be for lifetime. The war minister's opinion was that the title was granted by the Kaiser alone in the Kaiser had the right to withdraw it an honor court so decided in February 1904. Things dragged on for quite some time in 1905, the jury court decided that he was not guilty of using a title without authority. The Supreme Royal Court of Justice decided in 1906 that courts of honor had no jurisdiction over retired officers as retired officers were no longer in the army in the constitutional sense. The fact that the accused accepted the right to wear uniform and the honors that go with this on leaving the army can under no circumstances be regarded as a voluntary submission by him to the new regulations governing courts of honor. The war minister argued that retired officers were part of the army. This been clearly shown by the fact that they were saluted by regular soldiers, and therefore they had to accept the officer's code of honor and the decisions of the Court of honor. This whole mess continued on through different courts for years and finally ended in 1908 with him having lost the title.

[Mike Dwyer]

This is still not very clear!

Okay, I've read what everyone said, but this still isn't as clear as I'd hoped it would be.

By saying that an officer a.D. was retired, but still subject to military law, instant recall, and could wear the uniform, that, to me at least, implies that an officer z.D. was not. But, if an officer z.D. wasn't subject to all that, why is there special rank insignia to distinguish officers z.D. from officers a.D.? Obviously, officers z.D. could wear the uniform (at least under certain circumstances) because they have a specialized form of rank insignia to make them distinctive from active officers and officers a.D.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but to just say an officer z.D. was retired and leave it at that doesn't cover the subject. If they've got special rank insignia, they must have had some authorization to wear the uniform, at least. Wouldn't you think so?

[joerookery]

Mike,

By saying that an officer a.D. was retired, but still subject to military law, instant recall, and could wear the uniform, that, to me at least, implies that an officer z.D. was not.

I agree it's not clean and it was never clean in the courts. My understanding of it is that ZD could be assigned. But that AD was finished. Both of them wore uniforms, and I think the authorization comes in a guidebook regulation, which I have around here somewhere, but can't lay my hands on. The civil courts ruled that retired officers of any type or not subject to honor courts. The Kaiser, war minister, and officer corps did not see it that way. Does this confusion more?