K. Friedrich: The Other Prussia

Friedrich, Karin: The other Prussia. Royal Friedrich rightly believes have been overly in- Prussia, Poland and liberty, 1569-1772. Cam- fluenced by nineteenth and twentieth-century bridge: Cambridge University Press 2000. national prejudice. The book opens with ISBN: 0-521-58335-7; XXI + 280 S. a sustained attack on the ’Germanisation’ of Prussian history which echoes and ex- Rezensiert von: Gudrun Gersmann, Institut tends the author’s earlier condemnation of für Neuere Geschichte, LMU München this trend in her recent contributions (’fac- ing both ways: new works on Prussia and The rise of the German Machtstaat and the Polish-Prussian relations’, in: German His- demise and subsequent re-emergence of a Pol- tory 15 [1997], 256-267, and ’Politisches Lan- ish national state have cast a long shadow desbewußtsein und seine Trägerschichten im over Prussian history. In her impressive first Königlichen Preußen’, in: Nordost-Archiv NS book, Karin Friedrich seeks to expose the na- 6, [1997], 541-564). In discussing the Prus- tionalist distortions of past historical writ- sification of German history entailed by the ing and, in particular, rescue the ’other Prus- Borussian myth of Hohenzollern Prussia’s sia’ from the relative obscurity imposed by destiny to unite the German lands, she rightly its long incorporation in the Hohenzollern identifies the Germanisation of Prussian his- monarchy 1772-1918. At the heart of this en- tory which drew a ’direct line’ from the Teu- deavour is the attempt to recover and explain tonic Knights to the Hohenzollern dynasty. the formation of Royal (or Polish) Prussian Continued by the subsequent tradition of Os- identity, primarily from the perspective of the tforschung, this interpretation constructed a burghers of the province’s three great cities: false ’Prussian identity’, supposedly based on Danzig, Thorn and Elbing. the German origins of the Prussian burghers The theoretical questions raised by such a and the legacy of Teutonic rule. This contin- project are dealt with directly in the intro- ued the denigration of the Commonwealth’s ductory chapter. Friedrich disputes the view political system, begun by the Great Elector of that nationalism is solely the product of the Brandenburg in the later seventeenth century French Revolution and the modern definition and intensified during the period of the late of popular sovereignty, and argues that early eighteenth-century partitions, and which in- modern ’patriots’ developed a sophisticated volved symbolic violence such as the renam- sense of identity. Here Friedrich follows Bene- ing of the annexed province as ’West Prus- dict Anderson and others who interpret na- sia’ to imply a false unity of Hohenzollern tional sentiment as an artificial creation, ar- domains. Polish historians do not escape ticulated as an idealised ’imagined commu- criticism either, especially those who propa- nity’, primarily by a political and intellectual gated an artificial cultural and historical ho- elite. However, she challenges two widely- mogenity for the whole Baltic shore area. The held assumptions about nationalism. First, firm conclusion from this is that early mod- early modern patriotism did not differ greatly ern Prussian identity cannot be explained in from modern nationalism since the latter is terms of two rival processes of ’Germanisa- never truly a ’mass phenomenon’, but is also tion’ and ’Polonisation’. fostered by a relatively narrow elite. Second, The analysis of Prussian identity is located her findings on Prussian and wider Polish na- in the wider context of the Polish monarchy tional sentiment do not support the custom- which secured direct control over the western ary distinction between ’western’ and ’east- half and overlordship over the eastern half af- ern’ European forms of nationalism, in that ter its defeat of the Teutonic Order in the Thir- Prussian identity was not the product of eth- teen Years War (1454-66). The revolt of the nicity, but clearly based on a political identi- Prussian estates against the Teutonic Knights fication with the Polish-Lithuanian Common- in 1454 not only led to the recognition of the wealth. Polish king as their sovereign, but proved to This theme is pursued strongly throughout be a pivotal event in the formation of Prussian the book and used repeatedly to challenge identity since it forged a common bond, not and overturn previous judgements which just between Prussians and the Poles who had

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. supported them, but also within Prussia itself forces Friedrich’s argument that politics, not between the burghers and nobles. The shared ethnicity, lay at the heart of Prussian identity, experience contributed to the special charac- because what divided szlachta and burghers teristics of Prussian identity and help account was not the preservation of any alleged cul- for its political, rather than ethnic basis. At tural autonomy, but how best to safeguard the heart of Prussian identity was the affir- their treasured liberty within the framework mation of political ideals which were broadly of the new Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth compatible with those of the Polish monar- established in 1569. Whereas the szlachta chy and subsequent Polish-Lithuanian Com- came to see direct participation in the cen- monwealth. These ideals provided the essen- tral assembly, or sejm, as the best means of tial common ground that enabled the Prus- ensuring representation of Prussian interests, sians to become and remain members of the the cities refused to participate. As Friedrich Commonwealth without sacrificing their own demonstrates convincingly, this boycott was sense of themselves. In short, it was politi- not due to any reluctance to abandon ’Ger- cal assimilation, not cultural. Similarly, the man’ culture, but a preference for represen- break with Teutonic rule was a political act tation through the vibrant Prussian diet and and not a rejection of ’Germanness’ which in their direct relationship to the Polish crown. any case had not existed. Like the later Ho- Though the nobility renounced those parts of henzollern absolutism, Teutonic rule was re- the Kulm laws which hindered their accumu- jected because it was regarded as arbitrary, lation of estates, they nonetheless remained alien and incompatible with the desire of the active in Prussian politics and shared many of Prussian elite to manage its own affairs. the burghers’ beliefs about their place in the Prussian identity was underpinned by Commonwealth. several peculiar social characteristics which These beliefs are explored at length through were not disturbed by the transfer to Polish the careful examination of numerous contem- rule. Foremost among these was the relative porary publications and manuscript sources strength of the Prussian towns which enjoyed describing Prussian history, laws and politics. full rights in the Prussian diet, at least prior As Friedrich notes, the emergence of early to the later seventeenth century. Though the modern Prussian identity coincided with the Prussian szlachta (nobility) regarded them- growing importance throughout Europe of selves as the ’political nation’ like their Pol- history and myth as the basis of national sen- ish counterparts, they were both unable and timent. Though Prussian writers incorpo- largely unwilling to exclude the bigger cities rated elements of their German legacy, they from regional politics, primarily because the blended a variety of other historical myths to burghers retained relatively favourable prop- support the idea that they had always ruled erty rights. These rights were enshrined in the themselves except when under the ’foreign’ province’s legal code known as the Kulm laws oppression of the Teutonic Order. Signifi- (Kulmer Handfeste) which reinforced com- cantly, these Prussian histories „never ignored mon identity because it applied to both so- the larger dimension of the wider Common- cial groups. A further factor was the rela- wealth“ (p.78), as they also incorporated el- tively inclusive definition of the ius indigena- ements of the Gothic and Sarmatian myths tus restricting civil appointments to Prussian underpinning Polish identity. This enabled natives. Whereas the Poles restricted this to the Prussians to identify with the wider Com- landowning noblemen of the third generation monwealth as the ideal political community born in a province, the Prussians continued to without sacrificing a sense of their own dis- include burghers as indigena Prussiae. tinctiveness. The Prussians considered them- Prussian social cohesion was not per- selves part of a wider family of Sarmatian manent, however. Significantly, tensions peoples sharing a common political system emerged precisely where the differences be- which balanced provincial autonomy with tween szlachta and burghers intersected with central power. the controversy surrounding Prussia’s rela- The rest of the work charts how these be- tionship to the Polish monarchy. This rein- liefs changed as the Commonwealth under-

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. K. Friedrich: The Other Prussia went a series of ever greater crises from the port amongst the cities which helped frustrate mid-seventeenth century. Though the Prus- attempts to reform the Commonwealth in the sians shared a love of autonomy with the 1760s and in so doing, assisted in the demise Cossacks, their sense of liberty was tem- of the framework which had preserved their pered with loyalty to the Polish crown and autonomy for so long. the political ideal of the Commonwealth, and In addition to the clear and lucid recon- they roundly condemned the Cossack revolt struction of Prussian identity, Friedrich con- of 1654 which helped precipitate a series of tributes to a number of other debates. The re- devastating foreign invasions. The Prussian cent rehabilitation of Augustus’ reputation by cities remained loyal throughout these, as a number of Polish historians is questioned well as the later Turkish wars which placed by the clear evidence of the Prussians’ dis- them under financial strain. Nonetheless, a trust of his intentions and the damage in- key element of their traditional identity was flicted by his policies on the crown’s rela- undermined when the Great Elector gained tions with the provinces. By contrast, his full sovereignty for Ducal (East) Prussia in Hohenzollern contemporary, King Friedrich 1657 and began promoting a separate Hohen- I, comes off rather better as Friedrich joins zollern Prussian identity, hostile to the Com- a number of scholars who have emphasised monwealth and its values. Whereas Prussian the importance of the new royal title to the identity had previously rested on the memory emergence of Brandenburg-Prussia as a ma- of resistance to Teutonic oppression, the new jor power. Though secondary to the discus- Hohenzollern identity not only promoted the sion of Royal Prussian identity, the analysis superiority of absolutist rule, but implied that of that fostered by the Hohenzollerns breaks its benefits should rightfully be extended to new ground and is a valuable contribution to the Royal Prussians. The latter had no inten- our understanding of Prussia’s place in Ger- tion of accepting this and joined their king in man and European history. Finally, the find- protesting at the Hohenzollern’s acquisition ings reaffirm the flexibility of early modern of a Prussian royal title in 1701. thought as it is clear that phenomena like However, such demonstrations of loyalty Neostoicism and Natural Law were easily ac- were declining as Prussia suffered renewed commodated within the values systems of the foreign invasion as their new sovereign, Au- Commonwealth, despite their usual associa- gustus II, plunged the Commonwealth into tion with more authoritarian forms of govern- the Great Northern War (1700-21). Though the ment. beleaguered burghers refused to support their However, there are times when the under- king’s enemies, the war widened the growing standable desire to refute earlier nationalist rift between them and the Commonwealth. prejudice has unfortunate results. The pri- This changing relationship was reflected in mary focus on the three great cities of Danzig, new ideas of Prussian identity which backed Thorn and Elbing invites comparison with away from the earlier myths of a common pa- the more numerous free imperial cities in the gan past and stressed instead the existence of contemporary Holy Roman Empire, or old an ancient Prussian state which had survived Reich. This is offered on a number of oc- Teutonic rule and joined the Commonwealth casions (esp. pp.63-70), but primarily used as an equal partner. This new emphasis on to demonstrate the distinctiveness of Prussian Prussian distinctiveness was in part a reaction cities as a means of re-emphasising that their to the fading charms of the Commonwealth identity had little or nothing to do with adher- which, far from embodying an ideal form of ence to a common German culture. This has rule, now seemed a symbol of impotence and meant that some similarities have been ne- corruption. However, it was also a response glected. The fact that the political experience to a more exclusive sense of Polishness which of imperial and Prussian towns might be simi- redefined the Sarmatians in narrower cultural lar does not invalidate the argument that their and confessional terms, excluding German- self-perception drew on different roots, but speakers and Protestants. The new sense of nonetheless does point to important parallels Prussian distinctiveness found greatest sup- between the Reich and the Commonwealth.

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. Though the Reich did not recognise a right of tion as local metaphor. Württemberg, Im- resistance, its whole political culture rested on perial Germany, and national memory 1871- a desire to resolve violence peacefully and to 1918, Chapel Hill: University of North Car- balance the competing interests of its diverse olina Press 1997). Such diversity is hinted at members. The adherence of the imperial cities for early modern Prussia, but not fully ex- to this culture, and their persistent loyalty plored, particularly in the case of local civic to the emperor who symbolised it, was thus loyalty. broadly similar to the Prussian cities’ belief This does not detract in any way from the that membership of the Commonwealth was value of the work, which is already based on the best safeguard for their own autonomy. an impressive array of sources and displays These aspects are minimised in the discussion a mastery of the topic across more than two of German political theory which places un- centuries. The text is supported by a useful due emphasis on the authoritarian aspects in glossary, maps and a gazetteer of place names. contemporary thought. Moreover, it is ques- It is altogether an important contribution to tionable whether the power of the Polish king Polish and German history, as well as to our to intervene in civic politics was greater than understanding of the place of identity in early that of the emperor. It is true that no emperor modern European history. appeared personally to negotiate a settlement to a local dispute like John Sobieski, but it Gudrun Gersmann über Friedrich, Karin: The is noteworthy that the latter failed to achieve other Prussia. Royal Prussia, Poland and liberty, a result. Seventeenth and eighteenth-century 1569-1772. Cambridge 2000, in: H-Soz-Kult emperors had long since learnt to avoid such 25.04.2001. actions as likely to result in humiliating pub- lic defeats, and instead sustained their role as supreme judge through the network of impe- rial courts and commissions. The comparison with German towns also suggests another issue worthy of attention. The focus on the three great Royal Prus- sian cities is fully justified given their role in Borussian accounts as supposed torchbear- ers of German identity. However, this has marginalised the place of the lesser towns in the account of Prussian identity. Like the im- perial cities, Danzig, Thorn and Elbing were all integrated into a wider political system, as well as cross-regional and international trade networks. It is thus understandable that their self-perception should reflect this relative cos- mopolitanism. However, as Mack Walker has demonstrated for the eighteenth cen- tury, imperial cities were also ’home towns’, where local loyalties played a role in defin- ing identities (German home towns. Com- munity, state and general estate, 1648-1817, Ithaca/London: Cornell UP 1971). Studies of later German national sentiment, such as Alon Confino’s model work on ninetheenth- century Württemberg, have also indicated that individual and communal identities dis- played a complex matrix of often conflicting local, regional and national elements (The na-

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved.