¹ Streeruwitz was in charge of the political section of Department lO.Kgf (the department responsible for POW affairs in the Austro-Hungarian War Ministry). He was a prominent Christian Social politician during the Austrian First Republic and served as chancellor in 1928. He wrote these lines in 1931. See Ernst, Streeruwitz, “Der Umsturz in Ruszligland und die Kriegsgefangenen,”in In Feindeshand. Die Gefangenschaft im Weltkriege in Einzeldarstellungen, ed. Hans, Weiland and Leopold, Kern, 2 vols. (Vienna, 1931), 1:268–70.Google Scholar See also his memoirs, Springfluumltber Österreich. Erinnerungen, Erlebnisse und Gedanken aus bewegter Zeit 1914–1929 (Vienna, 1937), and his manuscript Kriegsgefangene im Weltkrieg 1914 bis 1918, deposited in the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum in Vienna.Google Scholar

² The exact number of Austro-Hungarian POWs in Russia was never established. This had to do with the large number of Habsburg soldiers missing in action (837,483 when the war ended) and with faulty registration procedures on the part of the Russian military administration. The figure 2,111,146 Austro-Hungarian POWs is the official number compiled by the superintendent of POW affairs at the Austro-Hungarian War Ministry, Heinrich von Raabl-Werner. Russian figures are somewhat lower. The official figure published in 1925 in Rossiya v mirovoy voine 1914–1918 goda was 1,961,333 POWs in Russia (of those, 160,000–180,000 were German and 50,000 Turkish).Google Scholar See Raabl, Werner, “Gesamtzahl der Kgf.-u. Zivilgef.,” KA/ Nachlaszlig Raabl-Wernersol B 141:4/ Mappe 21; Weiland, and Kern, , eds., In Feindeshand, statistical appendix; A.Klevanskiy, “Voennoplenye tsentral', nykh derzhav v tsarskoi i revolyutsionnoi Rossii (1914–1918),” in Internatsionalisty v boyakh za vlast' Sovietov, ed. Birman, M. (Moscow, 1965), 21–65;Google Scholar Gerald, H. Davis, “The Life of Prisoners of War in Russia, 1914–1921,” in Essays on World War I: Origins and Prisoners of War, ed. Samuel R., Williamson and Peter, Pastor, East European Monographs 126 (New york,1918), 163–96.Google Scholar

³ On repatriation, see Hannes, Leidinger and Verena, Moritz, “Oumlsterreich-Ungarn und die Heimkehrer aus russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft im Jahr 1918,” Oumlsterreich in Geschichte und Literatur 6, no. 291 (1997): 385–403;Google Scholar Richard, Plaschka, Arnold, Suppan, and Horst, Haselsteiner,Innere Front. Militaumlrassistenz, Widerstand und Umsturz in der Donaumonarchie, vol. 2 (Vienna, 1974);Google Scholar Otto, Wassermair, “Die Meutereien der Heimkehrer aus russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft bei den Ersatzkoumlrpern der k.u.k. Armee im Jahre 1918” (Ph.D. diss., University of Vienna, 1968);Google Scholar and Inge, Przybilovszki, “Die Ruumlckfuumlhrung der österreich-ungarischen Kriegsgefangenen aus dem Osten in den letzten Monaten der k.u.k Monarchie” (Ph.D. diss., University of Vienna, 1965)Google Scholar. On the repatriation of the Hungarian POWs, see Peter, Pastor, “Hungarian POWs in Russia during the Revolution and Civil War, ” in Essays on World War I, ed.Williamson, and Pastor, ,149–62,Google Scholar and Ivan Voumllgyes, “Hungarian Prisoners of War in Russia,” Cahiers du monde russe et Soviitique 14 (1973). The quotation is from Leidinger and Moritz, “Österreich-Ungarn und die Heimkehrer,” 394.Google Scholar

⁴ From early in the war the Austro-Hungarian censorship began compiling lists of “injured” and “uninjured” prisoners. The underlying assumption was that only POWs who had been injured could be unequivocally cleared from treason. Thus, percentage rates of the injured among each nationality began circulating based on information provided in the POWappos;s letters.Google Scholar See Alon, Rachamimov, “Marginalized Subjects: Austro-Hungarian POWs in Russia, 1914–1918” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, forthcoming), chap. 3.Google Scholar

⁵ As if to confirm this view, a series of large-scale mutinies that were organized and led in many cases by returning POWs broke out among Austro-Hungarian reserve units in the spring and summer of 1918

⁶ On captivity, see the following works: articles by Robert, Ezerov, Julija, Kudrina, Hannes, Leidinger, Verena, Moritz, Reinhard, Nachtigal, Alon, Rachamimov, and Evgeny, Sergeev in the special issue of Zeitgeschkhte 11–12 (1998); Yücel Yanikda“Ottoman Prisoners of War in Russia, 1914–1922,” Journal of Contemporary History 34, no. 1: 69–85;Google Scholar Leidinger, and Moritz, , “Österreich-Ungarn und die Heimkehrer,” Marina Rossi, I prigionieri dello Zar: soldati italiani dell'esercito austro-ungarko nei lager della Russia 1914–1918 (Milan, 1997);Google Scholar Reinhard, Nachtigal,“Kriegsgefangene der Habsburgermonarchie in Russland,” Österreich in Geschichte und Literatur 4–5a (1996): 248–62; articles by Ivo, Banac, Gerald, Davis, Josef, Kalvoda, Arnold, Krammer, Peter, Pastor, and Rowan, Williamson in Essays on World War I, ed. Williamson, and Pastor, (Gerald Davis's article in this collection is an excellent introduction to the subject);Google Scholar Ivan, Volgyes, “Hungarian Prisoners of War in Russia,” Cahiers du monde Russe et Soviitique 14 (1973);Google Scholar Weiland, and Kern, , eds., In Feindeshand; and Elsa Brändström, Among Prisoners of War in Russia and Siberia,trans. C.Mabel, Rickmers, with preface by Nathan Soderblom, Archbishop of Upssala (London,1929).Google Scholar

⁷ Regarding the Czech Legion, the South Slav Legion, and the Bolshevik Internationalists, see,respectively, Vlastimil Váevra, “Formováení České družiny,” Historie a Vojenství (1990): 107–18;Google Scholar John, Bradley, The Czechoslovak Legion in Russia, 1914–1920, East European Monographs 321 (New York, 1991);Google Scholar Josef, Kalvoda, “Czech and Slovak Prisoners of War in Russia during the War and Revolution,” in Essays on World War I, ed. Williamson, and Pastor, , 215–38;Google Scholar Karel, Pichlik, Zahraničnf odboj bez legend (Prague, 1968);Google Scholar Margarete, Klante, Die Geschichte der Tschechischen Legion in Ruβland (Berlin, 1929);Google Scholar Za, svobudu: Obrázkovd kronika českloslovenského hnuti na Rusi 1914–1920, 4vols. (Prague, 1924);Google Scholar Josef, Kudela, Přehled vŷyvoje csl. revolučího hnutí na Rusi (Prague, 1923);Google Scholar Frantiaek, Steidler, Ceskoslovenské hnutí na Rusi (Prague, 1922);Google Scholar Lager, Front oder Heimat. Deutsche Kriegsgefangene in Sowjetruβland 1917–1920, ed. Inge, Pardon and Waleri, Schrawiljov, 2 vols.(Berlin, 1994);Google Scholar Arnold, Krammer, “Soviet Propaganda among German and Austro-Hungarian Prisoners of War in Russia,” in Essays on World War I, ed. Williamson, and Pastor, , 249–64; V“Hungarian Prisoners of War”Google Scholar M., Birman, ed., Internatsionalisty v boyakh za vlas't Sovietov (Moscow, 1965)Google Scholar; and Ivo, Banac, “South Slav Prisoners of War in Revolutionary Russia,” in Essays on World War I, ed. Williamson and Pastor,119–48.Google Scholar

⁸ Until the arrival of Masaryk in Russia in the spring of 1917, only 3,000 Czech POWs volunteered for the Legion. It is not exactly clear how many volunteered during the next year, when a recruiting drive was launched. The figure of 100,000 proposed by the Czech nationalist historians in the 1920s and 1930s is exaggerated. See VáaVra, “Formovánüacutev České družiny,” and Kalvoda, , “Czech and Slovak Prisoners of War.” Kalvoda put the figure at 40,000 to 50,000. Regarding the South Slavs, see Banac, , “South Slav Prisoners of War.”Google Scholar

⁹ Wassermair, , “Die Meutereien der Heimkehrer,” 87–88.Google Scholar

¹⁰ There were strong reasons for not making such a commitment, including the knowledge that eventually they would be required togive account for their behavior in Russia. The Austrian military chaplain, Karl Drexel, described how officers captured together put together an agreed version of the circumstances surrounding their capture; Karl, Drexel, Feldkurat in Sibirien (Innsbruck,1940).Google Scholar In another example, according to a letter written by one of the prisoners, a Czech recruiting officer attempting in the summer of 1917 to enlist POW volunteers in the labor camp Kamenskii Zavod found only “three fools who are willing to support the continuation of the war,” this despite four days of propaganda activity among many Czech, , Romanian, , Croat, , and Slovene, prisoners.Google Scholar

¹¹ Hubertus, Jahn, Patriotic Culture in Russia during World War I (Ithaca, N.Y., 1995), 3.Google Scholar

¹² Péter, Hanák, “Die Volksmeinung während des letzten Kriegsjahres in Österreich–Ungarn,”in Die Auflösung des Habsburgerreiches Zusammenbruch und Neuorientierung im Donauraum (Vienna,1970), 58–66;Google Scholar Eric, Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality (Cambridge, 1990), 126–30.Google Scholar

¹³ Österreichisches Staatsarchiv/Kriegsarchiv/Armeeoberkommando (öStA/KA/AOK) 1916/Gemeinsames Zentralnachweisbüiro des Roten Kreuzes-Auskunftstelle für Kriegsgefangene (GZNB) Kart. 3745, Akt. 4117/2. POW Majer Freund to his wife Rachela in Mosciska, Galicia, August 30,1916: “I am sick of Jacob Eisler. He is living here with a Christian woman and wants to go to America with her. I want you to tell this to his wife, Beily.”Google Scholar

¹⁴ According to official Austrian figures there were altogether 1,861,000 captive enemy soldiers in the Habsburg monarchy. Of them the two largest groups were Russian POWs (1,269,000) and Italian POWs (369,600). In Germany there were 1,484,000 Russian POWs. Weiland, and Kern, , eds., In Feindeshand, statistical appendix.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Heinrich, Freiherr von Raabl-Werner, , “Österreich-Ungams offizielle Kriegsgefangenenfürsorge,”Google Scholar in Ibid., 2:325. On the function of the Austro-Hungarian censorship during World War I, see Gustav, Spann, “Zensur in Österreich während des I. Weltkrieges 1914–1918” (Ph.D. diss.,University of Vienna, 1972)Google Scholar

¹⁶ On history from below, on the related approach of Alltagsgeschichte, and on military history from below,Google Scholar see Samuel, Hynes, The Soldier's Tale: Bearing Witness to Modern War (New York,1997)Google Scholar; Alf Lüdtke, , ed., The History of Everyday Life: Reconstructing Historical Experience and Ways of Life, trans. William, Templer (Princeton, N.J., 1995);Google Scholar Wolfram, Wette, ed., Der Krieg des kleinen Marines (Munich, 1992);Google Scholar Jim, Sharpe, “History from Below,” in New Perspectives on Historical Writing, ed. Peter, Burke (University Park, Pa., 1989), 24–41Google Scholar; Richard, Holmes, Acts of War: The Behavior of Men in Battle (New York, 1986)Google Scholar; John, Keegan, The Face of Battle: A Study ofAgincourt,Waterloo, and the Somme (London, 1976)Google Scholar; and E. P., Thompson, “History from Below,” Times Literary Supplement, April 7,1966.Google Scholar

¹⁷ On the difficulties of analyzing letters, see Bernd, Ulrich, “Feldpostbriefe des ersten Weltkrieges: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer alltagsgeschichtlichen Quelle,” Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen 53, no. 1 (1994): 73–83.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Hanák, , “Die Volksmeinung,” Die Auflösung des Habsburgerreiches: Zusammenbruch und Neuorientierung im Donauraum, 58–66.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The language distribution of the letters was as follows: German, 818; Czech, 351; Polish, 149; Ukrainian, 61; Slovak, 36; Slovene, 27; Hungarian, 14; Italian, 7; Romanian, 5; Croat, 4; Serb, 2; and German translation without indication of the original language, 2. The rank distribution was as follows: rank and file, 1,099; officers, 237; one-year volunteers, 50; cadets, 42; ensigns, 34; chaplains, 2; and unclear, 12.

²⁰ On the Austro-Hungarian relief effort, see Nachtigal, “Kriegsgefangene”Google Scholar Davis, Gerald H., “National Red Cross Societies and Prisoners of War in Russia, 1914–1918,” Journal of Contemporary History 28 (1993): 31–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nora, Kinsky, Russisches Tagebuch 1916–1918 (Stuttgart, 1976)Google Scholar; Alexandrine von, Üxküill, Aus einem Schwesterleben (Stuttgart, 1956)Google Scholar; Brändström, , Among Prisoners of WarGoogle Scholar; Raabl-Werner, , “Österreich-Ungarns offizielle Kriegsgefangenenfürsorge,” 324–31Google Scholar; and Magdalene von, Walsleben, Die deutsche Schwester in Sibirien(Berlin, 1919).Google Scholar

²¹ Nachtigal, , “Kriegsgefangene,“ 255.Google Scholar

²² Willi, Keiner, a young German private from Frankfurt am Main, wrote home in November 1914: “It is getting very cold and everyone tells us through signs that our uniforms are just too thin … twenty men went to sleep in a circle, trying hard to keep our wet feet covered with hay. We fell asleep overly tired and when we woke up we found that only our heads were sticking out of the hay. The [Russian] soldiers had covered us so we would not freeze during the night.” “Grüsse aus Sibirien: Lebenszeichen eines Kriegsgefangenen 1914–1919,” manuscript in Bundesarchiv Militärarchiv (Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany), Msg. 200/1194, 3.Google Scholar

²³ Brändstrom, , Among Prisoners of War, 73. She does not say how she came up with these figures.Google Scholar

²⁴ Raabl-Werner, , “Österreich-Ungarns offizielle Kriegsgefangenenfürsorge,–31.Google Scholar

²⁵ The exchange rate of the Russian ruble fluctuated during the war. The Austro-Hungarian Kriegsministerium used an average of kr. 2.5 per ruble to evaluate the monetary worth of its relief. See Raabl-Werner, 's discussion in “Staatliche Hilfe,” in “Zusammenfassende Beantwortung der gestellten Fragepunkte,” Nachlafi Raabl-Werner, Kriegsarchiv B/14:4, 4–5.Google Scholar

²⁶ Johann von der, Wiilbecke, “Meine Erlebnisse in russischer Kriegsgefangenschaft,” Bundesarchiv Militärarchiv (Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany), Msg. 200/932,15–17.Google Scholar

²⁷ Raabl-Werner, , “Österreich-Ungarns offizielle Kriegsgefangenenfürsorge,” 324–31.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid.; Hobsbawm, , Nations and Nationalism since 1780,126–30.Google Scholar

²⁹ Friedrich, Spitzer, “Unsere Kriegsgefangenen und Intemierten in Ruβland und Rumanien N2,” chap. 1: “Besuche der österreichischen u. deutschen Schwestern vom Roten Kreuz,” pp. XIV-XV, öStA/KA/AOK 1917/ GZNB Kart. 3750, Akt. 4600.Google Scholar

³⁰ Platovka, , Orenburg, Jan Pekar, March 4, 1917 (letter originally written in Slovak), öStA/ KA/AOK 1917/ GZNB Kart. 3752, Akt. 4759, letter 70.Google Scholar

³¹ “Omsk (Omsk), Vladimir Zeman nach Wallachitsch-Wallachitsch-Meseritsch, Mähren,” without date, öStA/KA/AOK 1917/ Kart. 3750, Akt. 4600, letter 11d.

³² ÖstA/KA/AOK 1917/ Kart. 3751, Akt. 4664, letter 35.

³³ “Balashov (Gov Saratov), Kgf. I.B. an das Rote Kreuz in Prag,” April 2, 1917, AOK 1917/ GZNB Kart. 3751, Akt. 4700, letter 15; “Saratov, Josef Polcar nach Böhmen,” March 22,1917, AOK 1917/ Kart. 3752, Akt. 4759, letter 76b.

³⁴ “Stryetensk (Transbaikalien), Offiz Asp. Gyula Kisfalu nach Ungarn,” October 20,1917 (letter written originally in Hungarian), AOK 1917/1918/ GZNB Kart. 3756, Akt. 4932, letter 119. They were told this by the Swedish delegation itself.

³⁵ “Krasnojarsk (Janissesjk), Lt Rudolf Bauer nach Böhmen,” September 22,1917 (letter written originally in German), Ibid.., letter 90.

³⁶ “Agrys (Wjatka), Franz Uebergänger nach Tirol,” March 11,1917 (letter written originally in German), AOK 1917/ GZNB Kart. 3751, Akt. 4700, letter 1.

³⁷ “Totzkoje (Samara), Lt Gustav Pröglhof nach Nied. Oest. [Lower Austria],” October 21,1917 (letter written originally in German), AOK 1917/ GZNB Kart. 3756, Akt. 4980, letter 261.

³⁸ On the subversive tactics of soldiers during World War I, see Leonard, Smith, Between Mutiny and Obedience: The Case of the French Fifth Infantry Division during World War I (Princeton, N.J., 1994)Google Scholar; Wilhelm, Deist, “Verdeckter Militärstreik im Kriegsjahr 1918,” in Der Krieg des kleinen Mannes, ed. Wolfram, Wette (Munich, 1992)Google Scholar; Richard, Holmes, Acts of War: The Behavior of Men in Battle (New York, 1986)Google Scholar; and Tony, Ashworth, Trench Warfare: The Live and Let Live System (New York, 1980).Google Scholar