Chapter 3 Restoration of the Prussian ‘Military Monarchy’ and Organisation of Military Authorities
Frederick William iii was undoubtedly an unfortunate ruler, largely recalled in posterity as a colourless monarch, prone to hesitation and personally insecure. ‘A burgher on the throne’ wanting only to be ‘a good husband’ is how Karl Alex- ander von Herklots, the author of a poem in honour of the monarch, saw him already in 1798.1 The Prussian sovereign may have been noted for not seeking fame, carefulness and pedantry, but definitely not for a propensity to act. Quite unprepared for the throne, he spent his entire life in the shadow of the legend- ary creator of Prussian power, Frederick the Great. According to the biographer of Baron Karl vom Stein, he did not even compare well with his predecessor. ‘Frederick William ii. had had a high heart, an ardent imagination, much knowledge, and extraordinary physical vigour. In his chivalrous championship of Germany, he is thought to have aspired to revive the legendary fame of Ar- minius. Frederick William iii. is at the same time the most respectable and the most ordinary man that has reigned over Prussia’.2 These appraisals, however, allow us to forget that the 43-year reign of Fred- erick William iii was an important period in the history of the Prussian mon- archy. John Robert Seeley is right to say that despite his limitations, this king was the key figure in deciding the way Prussia developed in his day. ‘Frederick William iii, though he too committed great errors for which he was mercilessly punished, assuredly deserves our esteem and, if ever sovereign did, our pity. He inherited a declining government, he was surrounded from the outset with pernicious advisers, he had been ill-educated and had grown up with a bad example before him; it was hardly to be expected in these circumstances that he should see that anything required reform. But he had remained uncorrupt- ed; whatever in the former government had been repugnant to good sense and good feeling he discerned as clearly as if he had not grown up in the midst of it’.3
1 T. Stamm-Kuhlmann, ‘War Friedrich Wilhelm iii. ein Bürgerkönig?’, Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung 16, 4 (1989), 441–460. 2 J.R. Seeley, The Life and Times of Stein: Or, Germany And Prussia In The Napoleonic Age, vol. 1 (London, Cambridge, Leipzig, 1878), 195. 3 Ibid., 194.
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���� | doi:10.1163/9789004438439_005
Nevertheless, even with his declared reluctance to engage in war, the army remained one of the monarch’s most important interests. Napoleon was known to complain that he found it difficult to talk with the Prussian monarch about anything other than uniforms.4 This cutting remark, however, belies Frederick William’s genuine concern for an institution that was fundamental to the very existence of the Prussian monarchy. The union between the throne and the army was for him a prime concern, hence loyal service in the armed forces was perceived as a key element of service to the state. His understanding of obedi- ence to the monarch was literal and unconditional. An example of this attitude is his blocking of the construction of a statue of Maj. Ferdinand von Schill, the leader of a 1809 rebellion against the French in Stralsund. Despite Schill’s mer- its and patriotic stance, the king felt it was wrong to raise monuments honour- ing insubordination.5 This was the stance he also expected from the officers serving him. King was was undoubtedly the central figure of the Prussian armed forces. This was a direct consequence of Prussian tradition, where the monarch main- tained a special connection with military matters. The obvious ideal in this respect was Frederick the Great. As Małgorzata Konopczyńska has rightly noted:
the fundamental feature of the organisation of the supreme military au- thorities in the Prussian army was their personal nature. Frederick ii as- signed duties not according to titles or military rank, but according to the trust he had for particular people […] Frederick ii was very distrustful of his closest retinue, which compelled him to keep secret operation plans and most of his decisions from those closest to him. For the implementa- tion of what he wanted done, he engaged many agents without clearly defined competencies, which in effect resulted in a lack of transparency of actions and the overlapping responsibilities of various ministries and positions.6
Konopczyńska is of the opinion that the tradition was continued by succes- sors of Frederick ii. Even though he lacked the talent of his predecessor in these matters, the Prussian monarch retained the prerogative of supreme
4 Stamm-Kuhlmann, König in Preußens großer Zeit. Friedrich Wilhelm iii. der Melancholiker auf dem Thron (Berlin, 1992), 255. 5 F. Syben, Preußische Anekdoten. Nach Memoiren und Biographien (Berlin, 1939), 337. 6 M. Konopczyńska, Oficer-Urzędnik-Dworzanin. Kariery szlachty śląskiej w państwie pruskim (1749–1786) (Zielona Góra, 2014), 23.