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