British Imperialism in Books from the “Third Reich”

Empire and National Character: British Imperialism in Books from the “Third Reich” Victoria Jane Stiles, MA, MA Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2015 Abstract This thesis examines the variety of representations and rhetorical deployments of the theme of British Imperialism within books published in the “Third Reich”. The thesis considers these books not only as vehicles for particular ideas and arguments but also as consumer objects and therefore as the product of a series of compromises between the needs of a host of actors, both official and commercial. It further traces the origins of the component parts of these texts via the history of reuse of images and extracts and by identifying earlier examples of particular tropes of “Englishness” and the British Empire. British imperial history was a rich source of material for National Socialist writers and educators to draw on and lent itself to a wide variety of arguments. Britain could be, in turns, a symbol of “Nordic” strength, a civilisation in decline, a natural ally and protector of Germany, or a weak, corrupt, outdated entity, controlled by Germany’s supposed enemies. Drawing on a long tradition of comparing European colonial records, the British Empire was also used as a benchmark for Germany’s former imperial achievements, particularly in moral arguments regarding the treatment of indigenous populations. Through its focus on books, which were less ephemeral than media such as newspaper and magazine articles, radio broadcasts or newsreels, the thesis demonstrates how newer writings sought to recontextualise older material in the light of changing circumstances. Through managing the context in which earlier British and Anglophile material was read, doubt could be cast on the integrity of such views and on the trustworthiness of what was styled as the “English national character”. This demonisation of Britain through her imperial record became a key focus of Anglophobic books published in Germany during the Second World War. 2 Acknowledgements A great many thanks are owed to Maiken Umbach and Elizabeth Harvey of the University of Nottingham for their supervision, advice and encouragement, as well as to examiners Neil Gregor and Jonathan Kwan. Valuable suggestions were also provided by Colin Heywood, Stefan Berger and Jean-Marc Dreyfus during the project’s early stages. The author also wishes to thank Sheona Davies and Tom Bourne for going above and beyond in providing all manner of support. The work done by the German Historical Institute London, German History Society and Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst in nurturing postgraduate researchers has been invaluable throughout the project. Finally, the author is indebted to the staff of the British Library, Berlin Staatsbibliothek, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Lichterfelde and the Political Archive of the Auswärtiges Amt for their assistance. 3 Contents Page 5 Introduction 34 Chapter 1 - Product placement: Pitching books on Britain and the British Empire to readers and regulators 63 Chapter Two - Criticism between Friends: An Anglo-German Dialogue on Empire 91 Chapter 3 - Englishness and Empire in Books for use in Schools 121 Chapter 4 - “If this reads like a bandit novel…” Authority, Credibility and Incorporation 151 Chapter 5 - Reading the Enemy: The German “unmasking” of British imperialism in books from the Second World War 181 Chapter 6 - “The Empire against Europe”: The British as imperialists in German publications for an international audience 213 Conclusion 216 Primary Bibliography 222 Secondary Bibliography 4 Introduction Figure 1: Die Totengräber kleine Nationen (1941), image 6. The above image is from the set “Britische Bilder” by artist A. Paul Weber, which was printed as a book in 1941 under the title Die Totengräber kleiner Nationen (“The Gravediggers of Small Nations”). The accompanying text, which is unattributed but almost certainly not written by Weber, is printed in German, French and English. The caption for this picture, given the heading “Gibraltar” in German and French, and “The Monster of Gibraltar” in English, is worth quoting in full: War against weaker nations has invariably constituted England’s master-stroke. In 1704 Spain was no longer the world power she had been in former days. England, on the other hand, already had her spoils in India, her interests in Africa, and her intentions in the Mediterranean. Gibraltar formed an essential part of those intentions. The British ambassador Richard Hill wrote to Admiral Rooke that Gibraltar was not worth less to England than was Scotland. The 1800 soldiers who conquered Gibraltar for England consisted mainly of a Dutch “auxiliary corps.” Immediately after the conquest the English proceeded to reconstruct the ancient fortress which they henceforth regarded as a “national property of the English.” 5 This claim was confirmed by the Peace of Utrecht in 1713. All the efforts made by Spain to recover this part of her territory have invariably failed, and England is in a position to announce at all times that she has the “key to the Mediterranean” in her pocket. Image and text together draw on long-standing resentment within Europe against particular aspects of British foreign policy, seen as imperialist in nature. Yet the strength of revulsion conveyed by the image, and the detail in the text, point to a perceived need to remind the audience of this history. The choice of a spider is a common one in anti-British illustrations from the Second World War and earlier conflicts. A solitary animal which preys on whatever passes by building disruptive webs, it is an apt symbol for the type of rapacious, unconstructive imperialism often attributed to Britain.1 The fortress in Weber’s drawing is bristling with guns but is otherwise a featureless mound, devoid of any signs of human creativity or expertise, and ominously overshadows the small sailing boat passing beneath. The choice of spider also arises from and comments on features of British foreign policy, which relied on maintaining control over key transportation routes. The spider would usually be shown dominating a map or globe, merging geographical fact with propagandistic metaphor in a way which manipulates pre-existing knowledge and seeks to permanently alter the audience’s perception of those factual foundations. In the six years of uneasy peace between Nazi Germany and Britain, the German public had access, through bookshops, libraries and school English lessons, to a range of material which purported to promote understanding between the two peoples, and especially to explain those features of the “English character” which had built and secured the British Empire. However, these were not works of uncritical admiration but also a vehicle for comparison between Britain and the “new” Germany, as well as for raising doubts about the sustainability of Britain’s system of imperial rule and her intentions towards Germany. The double-page maps of the British Empire found in many German books on the subject created a paradox in that they were simultaneously an inducement to emulation and a demonstration of its impossibility. To any armchair colonial enthusiast it would be clear that 1 Matthew Stibbe, German Anglophobia and the Great War, 1914-1918 (Cambridge, 2001) pp.27-30. 6 there was barely a zone of operation left on the globe which was not within the British sphere of influence. A change of perspective would be all that was needed to turn a relatively objective map of trade routes (such as the one in Figure 2, below) into a vast spider’s web, jealously guarded from London. Figure 2: Heralds of British Imperialism (1938) p.22 The publication of Weber's anti-British works as a book also illustrates the complexity of the question of artistic and academic collaboration with the Nazi regime. Over the course of his long career, Weber directed his satirical cartoons against a wide range of targets, internal and external, during the Weimar, Nazi and post-war eras. His illustrations for Ernst Niekisch's 1931 pamphlet Hitler: ein deutsches Verhängnis and his depictions of the horror and destructiveness of conflict earned him a post-war reputation as a resistance figure. In this interpretation, even the works which earned him praise under National Socialism contained hidden warnings and criticism of the regime. However, this legacy has been called into question by studies which point to his nationalist politics and many anti-Semitic drawings.2 The topic of British imperialism allowed for the deployment of 2 Claire Aslangul, 'L'artiste Andreas Paul Weber entre national-bolchevisme, nazisme et antifascisme: Image, mémoire, histoire' in Vingtième Siècle. Revue d'histoire 99 (2008), pp. 160-187; Thomas Dörr, "Mühsam und so weiter, was waren das für Namen..." Zeitgeist und Zynismus im nationalistisch-anti-semitischen Werk des Graphikers A. Paul Weber (Bonn, 2000). 7 many voices, German and foreign, modern and historical, whose stated opinions on other subjects were not in keeping with National Socialist messages. Weber’s case is just one example of this. The explanatory text for Weber’s drawing provides an example of how economically the triangular relationship between the British Empire, British policies towards Europe, and a posited “English national character” could be expressed. These three elements were at the heart of the German anti- British stereotype propagated during the Second World War and were easily conveyed through the narration of events from British imperial history. In this case, the description of Britain’s acquisition of Gibraltar conveys the extent of Britain’s imperial holdings at the time, the “divide and conquer” tactics of using one European country’s troops against another in order to increase Britain’s power in Europe, and the arrogance which drives the British to “announce at all times” that they now have control over the Mediterranean. Each of these three elements invoked a long history of European resentment against British “perfidy”, and books such as Britische Bilder used British imperial history as a bountiful source of examples which “proved” the stereotype.

Load more