No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
The pistol remains the weapon of cripples, the senile, and those infected with a communicable disease. The murder instrument of the highwayman, the dastardly, insidious pistol, is the preferred weapon of the officer.
—Hugo Böttger, Editor of the Burschenschaftliche Blätter
Even though fraternity men glorified their duels with swords, a series of frivolous pistol duels with deadly ends led students to organize a movement against pistol duels that swept German universities in 1902 and 1903. Students argued that pistol duels violated the rules of reason, morality, and religion—and were thus also purportedly un-German. Male students organized assemblies, made passionate speeches, and passed resolutions in opposition to the pistol duel. They then sent these resolutions to the War Ministers in Prussia, Bavaria, and Saxony. Burschenschaft fraternity men built on their long tradition of liberal political activism and convened assemblies in Berlin, Bonn, Breslau, Freiburg, Giessen, Greifswald, Halle, Kiel, Königsberg, Leipzig, Marburg, Munich, Rostock, and Tübingen and passed resolutions inspired by the movement. Some of these assemblies drew large numbers of students, for example, 600 students in attendance in Leipzig, 1,500 in Munich, and 1,500 in Freiburg. In Berlin, leaders of 67 organizations representing 2,400 members signed petitions against the pistol duel. Other universities not included were majority Catholic institutions, such as Münster or Würzburg, where the opposition to all forms of the duel was even stronger as a result of the Catholic Church's prohibition against dueling. Reaching universities throughout Germany, this movement united students from across the political spectrum.
1 “Zur Duelldebatte,” 10.XVT Burschenschaftliche Blätter (15 February 1902), 686–94.Google Scholar
2 These were striking numbers at a time when all twenty-one German universities enrolled 34,000 students. “Die studentische Bewegung gegen Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XVII (1 December 1902), 104; “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 312. About 20 percent of students joined dueling fraternities. See Konrad Jarausch, Students, Society, and Politics in Imperial Germany: The Rise of Academic Illiberalism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982), table 5–4.Google Scholar
3 Jefferies, Matthew, Imperial Culture in Germany, 1871–1918 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), 686–94.Google Scholar
4 Frevert, Ute, Ehrenmänner: das Duell in der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft (Munich: Beck, 1991), 160; McAleer, Kevin, Dueling: The Cult of Honor in Fin-de-Siècle Germany (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994); Slawig, Johannes, “Der Kampf gegen das Duellwesen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert in Deutschland unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Preußens,” Diss. Muenster Universität, 1986; Mills, Andrew Joseph, “Satisfaktion in Nineteenth-Century German Dueling Violence and Its Relevance for Literary Analysis,” German Review 86 (2011): 134–52. In contrast to earlier historiography, Sonja Levsen has found many similarities between politics and the outlooks of German and British students, see “Constructing Elite Identities: University Students, Military Masculinity, and the Consequences of the Great War in Britain and Germany,” Past and Present 198 (2008): 147–49 and Elite, Männlichkeit und Krieg. Tübinger und Cambridger Studenten 1900–1929 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 12. Thomas Weber's arguments are similar: Our Friend “The Enemy”: Elite Education in Britain and Germany before World War I (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2008), 235.Google Scholar
5 LaVaque-Manty, Mika, “Dueling for Equality: Masculine Honor and the Modern Politics of Dignity,” Political Theory 34, no. 6 (2006): 726; LaVaque-Manty, Mika, The Playing Fields of Eton: Equality and Excellence in Modern Meritocracy (Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press, 2009), 63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Langewiesche, Dieter, “The Nature of German Liberalism,” in Modern Germany Reconsidered, 1870–1945, ed. Martel, Gordon (London: Routledge, 1992), 97, 101–2; Repp, Kevin, Reformers, Critics, and the Paths of German Modernity: Anti-Politics and the Search for Alternatives, 1890–1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), 17, 104–48; Dickinson, Edward Ross, “Reflections on Feminism and Monism in the Kaiserreich, 1900–1913,” Central European History 34 (2001): 229; Eley, Geoff, “German History and the Contradictions of Modernity: The Bourgeoisie, the State, and the Mastery of Reform,” in Society, Culture and the State in Nineteenth-Century Germany, ed. Eley, Geoff (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997), 97–102.Google Scholar
7 Mazón, Patricia, Gender and the Modern Research University: The Admission of Women to German Higher Education, 1865–1914 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003); Albisetti, James C., Schooling German Girls and Women: Secondary and Higher Education in the Nineteenth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988); McClelland, Charles E., State, Society, and University in Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 306; Jarausch, , Students, Society, and Politics in Imperial Germany, 108.Google Scholar
8 Nipperdey, Thomas cited by Jefferies, Matthew in “Lebensreform: A Middle-Class Antidote to Wilhelminism?” in Wilhelminism and Its Legacies: German Modernities, Imperialism, and the Meanings of Reform, 1890–1930, eds. Eley, Geoff and Retallack, James (New York: Berghahn, 2004), 92; “Das Schlagwort ‘Modern’ und der deutsche Corpsstudent,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 142, 10.XII (26 January 1896), 394.Google Scholar
9 Zwicker, Lisa Fetheringill, Dueling Students: Masculinity, Conflict, and Politics in German Universities, 1890 to 1914 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2011), ch. 3,4.Google Scholar
10 Connell, R.W., Masculinities (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005), 686–94; Forth, Christopher E., Masculinity in the Modern West: Gender, Civilization, and the Body (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008); Mosse, George L., The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 17–23.Google Scholar
11 On the feudalization thesis see Klaus Vondung, “Zur Lage der Gebildeten in der wilhelminischen Zeit,” in Das wilhelminische Bildungsbürgertum. Zur Sozialgeschichte seiner Ideen, ed. Vondung, Klaus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 1976), 31; Rosenberg, Hans, Machteliten und Wirtschaftskonjunktur (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), 83–101; Blackbourn, David and Eley, Geoff, The Peculiarities of German History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984), 228–37; Augustine-Perez, Dolores L., “Very Wealthy Businessmen in Imperial Germany,” Journal of Social History 22 (1988): 301.Google Scholar
12 Piccato, Pablo, “Politics and the Technology of Honor: Dueling in Turn-of-the-Century Mexico,” Journal of Social History 33 (1999): 333, 340, 346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Krause, Sharon, Liberalism with Honor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 21.Google Scholar
14 Hughes, Steven, “Men of Steel: Dueling, Honor, and Politics in Liberal Italy,” in Men and Violence: Gender, Honor, and Rituals in Modern Europe and America, ed. Spierenburg, Pieter (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1998), 64, 76; Freeman, Joanne B., “Dueling as Politics: Reinterpreting the Burr-Hamilton Duel,” William and Mary Quarterly 53 (1996): 296–98, 317–18; Nye, Robert A., “Fencing, the Duel, and Republican Manhood in the Third Republic,” Journal of Contemporary History 25 (1990): 366, 369, 374. Even students at the time argued that the duel was consistent to the democratic cultures of the United States and elsewhere, “Eine Abrechnung mit den ‘Reformern,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 360, 12.XXX (15 November 1913), 383–85.Google Scholar
15 Frevert, Ute, Ehrenmänner, 187–91, 198; McAleer, Kevin disagrees in Dueling, 119–58.Google Scholar
16 Anderson, Margaret Lavinia, Practicing Democracy: Elections and Political Culture in Imperial Germany (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 8–13, 423; Suval, Stanley, Electoral Politics in Wilhelmine Germany (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985), 4–20, 21–36, 243–44; Fairbairn, Brett, Democracy in the Undemocratic State: The German Reichstag elections of 1898 and 1903 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press), 4, 14–22.Google Scholar
17 Titze, Hartmut, ed., Das Hochschulstudium in Preußen und Deutschland 1820–1944. Datenhandbuch zur deutschen Bildungsgeschichte (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1987), 26–27, 72. The offspring of the traditional Bildungsbürgertum made up 22 percent of all students in 1902. Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte. Von der “Deutschen Doppelrevolution” bis zum Beginn des Ersten Weltkrieges 1849–1914 Vol. 3 (Munich: Beck, C. H., 1995) 1211–16.Google Scholar
18 Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des Deutschen Reichstags 20. Sitzung. Montag, den 15. Januar 1906, 555; Stenographische Berichte, Reichstag 20. Sitzung. Montag, den 15. Januar 1906, 570, http://www.reichstagsprotokolle.de/Blatt_k11_bsb00002824_00571.html.Google Scholar
19 Schneider-Schönfeld, Irma, “Damen- und Kinderfechten,” Die Welt der Frau 51 (1912), 686–94.Google Scholar
20 Eberhard, E. H., “Die Anti-Duellbewegung in der deutschen Studentenschaft,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 322, 10.XXVII (1 February 1911), 334; Otto Helmut Hopfen, “Die Berechtigung des Zweikampfes,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 219, 3.XIX (1 July 1902): 88, 92.Google Scholar
21 Parker, David S., “Law, Honor, and Impunity in Spanish America: The Debate over Dueling, 1870–1920,” Law and History Review 19 (2001): 318; Hughes, Steven C., Politics of the Sword: Dueling, Honor, and Masculinity in Modern Italy (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2007) 115; Reddy, William M., The Invisible Code: Honor and Sentiment in Postrevolutionary France, 1814–1848 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 184–227.Google Scholar
22 “Die Karlsruher Duellaffäre,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 9.XVII (1 February 1903), 210. Immediately prior to the debates on the duel, a chemistry student in Jena also died as a result of a pistol duel. The widespread coverage of this tragedy helped to build momentum for the goal of banning the pistol duel at universities. “Jena,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 8.XVI (15 January 1902), 203; “Jena,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 9.XVI (1 February 1902), 229.Google Scholar
23 “Die Karlsruher Duellaffäre,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 9.XVII (1903 1 February), 210–13.Google Scholar
24 “Ein falscher Ehrbegriff?” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XVII (1902 1 November), 57.Google Scholar
25 Biastoch, Martin, Tübinger Studenten im Kaiserreich: Eine sozialgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, J., 1996), 139; “Zur Duelldebatte” 10.XVI Burschenschaftliche Blätter (1902 15 February) 242; “Zur Pistolenduellfrage,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 12.XVI (15 September 1902), 274.Google Scholar
26 “Zur Duelldebatte,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 10.XVI (15 February 1902), 243.Google Scholar
27 “Die studentische Bewegung gegen Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XVII (1 December 1902), 104.Google Scholar
28 Zwicker, , Dueling Students, ch. 2; “Das Duell in seinen rechtlichen Beziehungen, inbesonderen die studentischen Bestimmungsmensuren,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 1.XVT (1 October 1901), 6–7; Burschenschaftliche Blätter 9.XIX (1 February 1905), 214.Google Scholar
29 Nye, Robert A., Masculinity and Male Codes of Honor in Modern France (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 183–7.Google Scholar
30 “Generalversammlung der Anti-Duell-Liga,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 1.XVIII (1 October 1903), 9–10.Google Scholar
31 Burschenschaftliche Blätter 10.IX (15 February 1895), 294. Ute Frevert calls into question these numbers, Frevert, Ehrenmänner, 123.Google Scholar
32 1894: 83 People were convicted, 1895: 107, 1896: 110, 1897: 140, 1897: 154, 1899: 99, 1900: 98, 1901: 91, 1902: 74, 1903: 101, 1904: 101. “Die Stellungnahme des Strafgesetzentwurfes zum Zweikampf,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 4.XXIV (15 November 1909), 79.Google Scholar
33 “Die Stellungnahme des Strafgesetzentwurfes zum Zweikampf,” Burschenscbaftliche Blätter 4.XXIV (15 November 1909), 78.Google Scholar
34 “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 307.Google Scholar
35 “Presserundschau” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 4.XVI (15 November 1901), 79–80; “Neues vom Duell,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 4.XI (15 November 1896), 102–3; “Zur heutigen Mensurpraxis,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XII (1 December 1897), 131.Google Scholar
36 “Über Mensurbeurteilung,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 1.XXV (1 April 1911), 9; “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 309.Google Scholar
37 Klug, Ignaz, Ideal und Leben. Eine Sammlung ethischer Kulturfragen (Paderborn 1913), 25; “Die Anti-Duellbewegung in der deutschen Studentenschaft,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 322, 10.XXVII (1 February 1911), 334–38; “Katholizismus, Korps und Burschenschaft,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 313, 1.XXVII (1 May 1910), 1–11.Google Scholar
38 Dowe, Christopher, Auch Bildungsbürger. Katholische Studierende und Akademiker im Kaiserreich (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006) 304–8.Google Scholar
39 Sitzungs-Bericht über die 22. ordentliche Versammlung des Allgemeinen Deputierten-Convents der Deutschen Burschenschaften in Eisenach-Pfingsten 1903 (Leipzig 1903), Bundesarchiv Koblenz [BAK] DB9 Deutsche Burschenschaft ADC/CB 1883–1918 B/III 13.Google Scholar
40 For Mexico, Pablo Piccato argues that the Catholic Church's opposition to the duel “could only be construed as additional proof of the progressive meaning of the duel.” “Dueling in Turn-of-the-Century Mexico,” 333.Google Scholar
41 “Zu den Duelldebatten,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 11.XVI (1 March 1902), 268.Google Scholar
42 Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des Deutschen Reichstags 20. Sitzung. Montag, den 15. January 1906, 555, http://www.reichstagsprotokolle.de/Blatt_k11l_bsb00002824_00571.html.Google Scholar
43 “Presserundschau,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 4.XVI (15 November 1901), 79–80; “Duellfrage im Reichstag,” Burschenschaftliche Bläuer 6.XVI (15 December 1901), 134; Eberhard, E. H., “Die Anti-Duellbewegung und die deutsche Studentenschaft,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 322, 10.XXVII (1 February 1910), 334–6; “Das Duell und der germanische Ehrbegriff”, Academia 8.XII (10 April 1896), 360–1.Google Scholar
44 Dowe, , Katholische Studierende, 99–104.Google Scholar
45 “Schiefe Vergleiche,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 215, 11.XVIII (1 March 1902), 388; “Duell und Sozialdemokratie,” Anti-Duell-Liga 7 (May 1904): 2; “Ehre vor Gott oder Ehre bei den Menschen?” Anti-Duell 11 (May 1905): 2–7; “Das Duell ein Unrecht gegen die niederen Stände,” Anti-Duell-Liga 17 (November 1906): 6; “Zur Duellfrage,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 213, 9.XVIII (1 January 1902), 299–301; Stenographische Berichte… 15 January 1906, 552.Google Scholar
46 “Burschenschaft und Feudalismus,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XVI (1 December 1901), 110–2; Frevert, , Ehrenmänner, 159–67; Sitzungs-Bericht Eisenach-Pfingsten 1903 Sitzungs-Bericht des außerordentlichen Burschentags zu Berlin, Januar 1905 (Berlin 1905), Bundesarchiv Koblenz DB9 Deutsche Burschenschaft ADC/CB 1883–1918 B/III 5.6–10.Google Scholar
47 “Die Bewegung gegen die Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 6.XVII (15 December 1902), 686–94, 134; SC in Freiburg did not vote in favor of the resolution. “Weitere Meldungen über allgemeine Studentenversammlungen,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 6.XVII (15 December 1902), 135; “Gießen,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 7.XVII (1 January 1903), 172.Google Scholar
48 Sitzungs-Bericht des außerordentlichen Burschentags zu Berlin, Januar 1905 (Berlin 1905), Bundesarchiv Koblenz DB9 Deutsche Burschenschaft ADC/CB 1883–1918B/III5.Google Scholar
49 “Jena,” BB 8.XVI (15 January 1902), 203.Google Scholar
50 “Zweikampf nur mit blanker Waffe,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 2.XVII (15 October 1902), 33.Google Scholar
51 Frevert, Ute, A Nation in Barracks: Modern Germany, Military Conscription, and Civil Society (Oxford: Berg, 2004), 686–94; Showalter, Dennis E., “Army and Society in Imperial Germany: The Pains of Modernization,” Journal of Contemporary History 18 (1983): 583–618.Google Scholar
52 “Zur Duellfrage,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 1.XVI (1 April 1902), 7; “Schiefe Vergleiche,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 215, 11.XVIII (1 March 1902), 388.Google Scholar
53 Dr. med. Kurt Wagner, “Nochmals: Die Corps und der Alkohol,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 220, 4.XIX (1 August 1902), 123.Google Scholar
54 “Die studentische Bewegung gegen Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XVII (1 December 1902), 106; “Die Bewegung gegen die Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 6.XVII (15 December 1902), 129.Google Scholar
55 “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 12. Frevert, , Ehrenmänner-, 203–4; in Mexico and in England the pistol duel was also seen as more of an equal fight than the duel with swords. Piccato, “Dueling in Turn-of-the-Century Mexico,” 338; Shoemaker, “The Taming of the Duel,” 529.Google Scholar
56 “Die studentische Bewegung gegen Pistolenduelle,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 5.XVII (1 December 1902), 103; “Weitere Meldungen über allgemeine Studentenversammlungen,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 6.XVII (15 December 1902), 135; “Heidelberg,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 9.XVII (1 February 1903), 215; “Zu den Duelldebatten,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 11.XVI (1 March 1902), 268. Expectations for military officers: Klemens von Spohn, , ed., Die Conventionellen Gebräuche beim Zweikampf unter Berücksichtigung des Offizierstandes, 6th ed. (Berlin 1901).Google Scholar
57 “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 308.Google Scholar
58 “Säbel oder Pistole?” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 225, 9.XIX (1 January 1903), 312; “Eine Duelldebatte in der bayerischen Reichsratskammer,” Academische Monatshefte Nr. 311, 11.XXVI (1 March 1910), 392; “Ortsgruppe Straßburg,” Anti-Duell 15 (May 1906) 1–2.Google Scholar
59 Goldberg, Ann, Honor, Politics, and the Law in Imperial Germany, 1871–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 122; “Zur Duelldebatte,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 10.XVI (15 February 1902), 243; “Zu den Duelldebatten,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 11.XVI (1 March 1902), 268; “Berlin,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 7.XVII (1 July 1903); “Die Bewegung gegen das Duell,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 2.XVI (15 October 1901), 30–32; “Berlin,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXV (1 May 1911), 68.Google Scholar
60 “Zur Duellfrage,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 12.XVI (15 March 1902), 295.Google Scholar
61 Dietz, Heinrich, “Die Schlägermensur de lege ferenda,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXV (1 May 1911), 59; “Berlin,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXVI (1 May 1912), 62; “Zur Reform der Mensurbeurteilung,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXVI (1 May 1912), 50.Google Scholar
62 “Studentenmensuren” Neue Hamburger Zeitung (4 August 1912), 362.Google Scholar
63 Zwicker, Lisa Fetheringill, “Burschenschaft and German Political Culture, 1890–1914,” Central European History 42 (September 2009): 389–428.Google Scholar
64 Biastoch, Martin, “Die Corps im Kaiserreich-Idealbild einer Epoche,” Wir wollen Männer, wir wollen Taten!” in Deutsche Corpsstudenten 1848 bis heute, ed. Baum, Rolf-Joachim (Berlin: Siedler, 1998) 122.Google Scholar
65 “Die korpsstudentische preußische Verwaltung,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 2.XVII (15 April 1903), 33–34.Google Scholar
66 “Die Korpsdebatte im preußischen Abgeordnetenhaus,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XVII (1 May 1903), 60; “Die Korps und die Politik,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XVIII (1 November 1903), 56.Google Scholar
67 “Die Korpsstudenten-Debatten,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 4.XVII (15 May 1903), 79–81.Google Scholar
68 “Die Korps und die Politik,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XVIII (1 November 1903) 54–58.Google Scholar
69 McAleer, Kevin, Dueling: The Cult of Honor in Fin-de-Siècle Germany (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), 686–94; Ute Frevert disagrees with McAleer's claims about the political implications of the duel, Ehrenmänner. Das Duell in der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft (Munich, 1991). Frevert on the student code of honor: Ehrenmänner 134, on the duel and the German special path [Sonderweg] 16. For McAleer's criticism of Frevert see McAleer, , Dueling 197–209. See also Frevert's review of McAleer in Journal of Modern History 69 (1997): 630. See also Gay, Peter, The Cultivation of Hatred: The Bourgeois Experience Victoria to Freud (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1993), 14–15. V.G. Kiernan's negative interpretation of the student duel: The Duel in European History: Honour and the Reign of the Aristocracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
70 Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, The German Empire, 1871–1918 (Providence, RI: Berg, 1991), 126.Google Scholar
71 Torp, Cornelius, Müller, Sven Oliver, Imperial Germany Revisited. Continuing Debates and New Perspectives (New York: Berghahn Books, 2011).Google Scholar
72 Blackbourn, and Eley, , Peculiarities, 64, 106.Google Scholar
73 Mayer, Arno, The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe to the Great War (New York: Pantheon Books, 1981); Augustine, Dolores L., Patricians and Parvenus: Wealth and High Society in Wilhelmine Germany (Oxford and Providence: Berg Publishers, 1994), 7, 143; Breuilly, John, “The Elusive Class: Some Critical Remarks on the Historiography of the Bourgeoisie,” Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 38 (1998): 385–95; Reddy, William M., Money and Liberty in Modern Europe: A Critique of Historical Understanding (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 20–23; Kocka, Jürgen, Civil Society and Dictatorship in Modern German History (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2011), 23–24.Google Scholar
74 “Berlin,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXVI (1 May 1912), 62; “Zur Reform der Mensurbeurteilung,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 3.XXVI (1 May 1912), 50.Google Scholar
75 Schneider, Jeffrey, “Masculinity, Male Friendship, and the Paranoid Logic of Honor in Theodor Fontane's Effi Briest,” German Quarterly 75 (2002): 686–94; Kessel, Martina, “The ‘Whole Man': The Longing for a Masculine World in Nineteenth-Century Germany,” Gender & History 15 (April 2003): 1–31.Google Scholar
76 Similar dynamics: Bertram Wyatt-Brown, “Andrew Jackson's Honor,” Journal of the Early Republic 17, no. 1 (1997): 1–36.Google Scholar