Originally posted by der-hase-fee
View Post
-
Andreas, I don't understand your point. Are you writing that the SA numbers in Munich at this time were 800 but that not all of them went to Coburg? But we do have written evidence that the numbers of the Munich troop were supplemented by SA men from other towns of Southern Bavaria, either joining with the original band at the beginning of the trip or at some of the stops along the way. In addition, there is evidence that some joined in Coburg. -
I'm just speculating that a Hundertschaft - intentionally - wasn't made up of 100 men. It's an organizational term, like company. In the early years there was a need to inflate the membership numbers, so maybe each Hundertschaft was just made up of 50 men or so. Then ~400 SA men plus some others were on the train from Munich and were joint by some more along the way and those they met at Coburg.
The "800" is conveniently being used throughout (official party) records reporting on the event. However, perhaps 436 is a more accurate number.Comment
-
Okay, I understand your comment now. It is a possibility. We discussed back on thread #739 Hitler's confusing use of the term Hundertschaften in his Mein Kampf, when he described dividing his troops into fourteen companies (Hundertschaften). But then perhaps the entire Coburg 1922 affair was exaggerated for his own purposes, the story then perpetuated by subsequent writers who continued the party line? After all, the news carried in the Monday October 16, 1922 edition of the "Coburger Zeitung" hardly portrayed the events of that weekend as the bloody confrontation described in NSDAP texts.
On the other hand, the 800 number is not consistent and varies somewhat by a hundred or two in other party texts. And it would seem to be an extremely detailed hoax for Schwede-Coburg to report he had ordered 600 of the badges.Comment
-
Re the photo--it's very overexposed. If you look at the collar piping on the right side, it looks almost like Tresse due to the quality of the photo. The ribbon bar likely looks a bit thicker due to the exposure, focus, etc. Interestingly, he's not had the ribbon for the BO applied to his pocket flap. The sleeve insignia could be for the Freikorps von Epp, or the Freikorps Chiemgau?
ErichFestina lente!Comment
-
-*-
error postingComment
-
Given that the city of Coburg was known to be a communist stronghold at the time, and that is what encouraged Hans Dietrich and his colleagues representing the rightist front organizations to try and mount a "German Day" solidarity event there, the "Coburger Zeitung" may well have been of the leftist persuasion and their reporting of the events of that weekend were purposefully downplayed.
Br. JamesComment
-
The best period quote that I have read regarding the Coburg Badge and what it meant to the young party.Originally posted by JoeW View PostComment
-
Br. James, I don't sense that at all in the articles published. They seem very even handed in their viewpoint. Hitler's speeches are briefly reviewed. The Friday October 14 issue included information about The Third German Days events. The schedule of events was discussed at length, including the activities on the second day that were not shown on Erich's notice about the event. There was another full day of activities that began at 8:30 in the morning with lectures and concluded with a celebration evening at 8pm back at the Hofbrauhause with music and fellowship. As Hitler and his men left at 10pm as reported in the newspaper too, can one conclude he and his coterie joined with Hans Dietrich for some merriment before the long train ride back to Munich.Originally posted by Br. James View Post
One interesting note in that Friday issue was that the Oberfranken government administration had reinforced the Coburg police with additional forces that were kept in the local police barracks. The newspaper reported that " This action of the authorities can nevertheless neither be interpreted as a granting of elevated protection to the organizers of the German-ethnic day nor as a threat to the Coburger workclass." This seems to be an even-handed view of what was apparently recognized by the newspaper and the authorities as potential weekend of conflict.
One senses that the newspaper did not care for the forceful speeches of the leader of the NSDAP from Munich. But I have not found any references to the mayhem in the streets that was described in Mein Kampf.Comment
-
Very interesting, Joe, and thanks for the additional enlightenment! As I tried to state, my thinking was that if the local newspaper down-played the civic violence, then perhaps that was because of the paper's own political leanings. But it sounds like, if anything, the impressions given later by Hitler and other witnesses might have been toward over-playing the significance of what came to be known as The Battle of Coburg...?
In your reference to a "third day" of the German Day events in Coburg, are you indicating that the schedule actually began on Friday, October 13th, or extended through Monday, October 16th? We have been working on the assumption that the German Day events were scheduled to take place on Saturday and Sunday, October 14 and 15, 1922. If Hitler's 'special train' arrived in Coburg midday on Saturday, October 14th, were the events well under way when the train from Munich arrived in Coburg? Or did the train arrive at the beginning of the events, which were scheduled to continue through Monday, October 16th? A small point, I guess, but of interest at least to me. And if the Coburg police were supplemented by additional forces, the sense I'm getting from your latest note is that those police reinforcements were in place on Friday the 13th.
Br. JamesComment
-
Sorry for the confusion James. I was describing the events of The Third Geman(ic) Days that lasted two days, Oct 14th and 15th. That was the name of the event. The note about police reinforcements was in the Saturday 10/14/22 edition and as it spoke of the reinforcements being in place, I would presume it occurred earlier in the week. The reviews of the events were found in subsequent editions from Monday the 16th through Thursday the 19th.Last edited by JoeW; 07-23-2012, 02:56 PM.Comment
-
Thanks Joe, and not a problem! I'm just glad that we don't have yet another source of divergence in the telling of this story!
Br. JamesComment
-
Well I have searched and found no sign of a November 6, 1936 Fuhrer decree establishing the seven various party badges as "Ehrenzeichen". I found a copy of Dombrowski's 1940 book "Orden,Ehrenzeichen und Titel" that Mickey Huffman had cited as the source of his use of the Novembef 6, 1936 date. Dombrowski showed the November 14, 1935 directive concerning the earlier passed "Gesetz uber Titel, Orden und Ehrenzeichen". If this order passed November 14, 1935 establishes that by order of the Fuhrer and Reichskanzler the seven party badges were given status as "Ehrenzeichen", then one must conclude that Hitler gave his order before or concurent with the November 14, 1935 law. Therefore there was no November 6, 1936 Hitler order as everyone has been quoting these past decades. Another old collector's take bites the dust.Originally posted by JoeW View PostSpeaking of reference books, I would suppose the first one collectors have are the various editions of Doehle's wartime listing of medals and badges? It appears that it was used by many reference book writers, as some errors in Doehle appear to have been continued into the 1970s. Take for instance the date of the presentation of the Coburg Badge. On page 74 of my 1943 copy of Doehle's book, he cites the Coburg badge as having been presented on October 14, 1932. We know that is a bit early, as the Coburg annivesary occurred from October 15th through the 16th of 1932. And that Oct.14th date is offered by Angolia in his For Fuhrer and Fatherland.
Angolia also mentions the famous 6 November 1936 party decree establishing the Coburg Badge and other as official party Ehrenzeichen. But searching Doehle we seem to find some more inconsistencies. On page 74, Doehle cites the official party decree establishing the Ehrenzeichen of the Party as occurring on November 6, 1936. Yet on page 141, Doehle indicates the same decree as being issued on November 6, 1935. The Nov 6, 1936 date is cited by others and has been mentioned here, but we are not able to provide a copy of this decree. Does anyone have access to it?
Is there any other period mention of the decree besides in the Dohle books? I searched the Organisationsbuchs and found no decree of that date. But I did find a law dated November 14, 1935 that lists all the Ehrenzeichen of the NSDAP that are supposedly found in the November 6, 1936 decree. I attach it here.
Notice section 3 on the right hand page. The Ehrenzeichs are listed an authorized for wear by the order of the Fuhrer and Reichskanzler. Is this perhaps the party decree that have been mentioned before in reference books? Or is there actually a November.14,1936 decree?Comment
-
Joe,
I thought it was Hess who gave the decree order.Comment
-
That's the first mention of Hess, unless I am losing it which may be a possibility. Too much Coburg on the brain. The order I posted begins at & 3 "Aus Anordnung des Fuhrers und Reichskanzlers durfen des folgende Ehrenzeichens des nationalsocialistischen Bewegung gertragen worden:" The badges are then listed. I think that means Hitler gave the order.Originally posted by ErichS View PostComment
-
Here's a passing thought: in the English translation of the 1943 book by Döhle, on p.74 under the description of the Coburg Badge, it states: "The right to wear the special Coburg badge was authorized on November 6, 1936 through the SA headquarters." I wonder if we're not looking in the wrong place for the badge's authorization? Instead of the Chancellery (Hitler or Hess), perhaps there was an order issued through the SA-Hauptführung on that date by Viktor Lutze?
Again, just a thought...!
Br. JamesComment
Comment