Hitler 1889-1936: Hubris

Post,
5 December 1921; Heiden,
Hitler,
97.
    147 . Heiden,
Hitler,
100 where she is mistakenly named ‘Carola’. I am grateful to Martha Schad and Anton Joachimsthaler for informing me of the correct name.
    148 . Auerbach, ‘Hitlers politische Lehrjahre’, 22; Tyrell,
Trommler,
267 n.54.
    149 . According to Heiden,
Hitler,
116, though without supporting evidence, Hitler’s lengthy absence in Berlin was spent at the Bechsteins while he was taking elocution lessons. Whether or not he was brushing up his diction at the same time, the real purpose of his visit was more important than elocution: trying – if without great success – to rustle up funds for the party newspaper, probably through contacts opened up to him by Max Maurenbrecher, the editor of the Pan-German newspaper
Deutsche Zeitung,
with a number of individuals connected with the Pan-Germans (Tyrell,
Trommler,
117–18).
    150 . Tyrell,
Trommler,
96.
    151 . Tyrell,
Trommler,
103–4.
    152 .
JK,
436 (Hitler’s resignation letter of 14 July 1921).
    153 . Tyrell,
Trommler,
99–100, 105.
    154 . Tyrell,
Trommler,
101–3.
    155 . The above based on the findings of Tyrell,
Trommler,
106–9, 122·
    156 .
JK,
437; Tyrell,
Trommler,
118–19.
    157 . Tyrell,
Trommler, 110–
16, 119–20.
    158 .
JK,
437–8; Franz-Willing,
Hitlerbewegung, 110
.
    159 . Based on Tyrell,
Trommler,
120–22.
    160 .
JK,
438.
    161 .
JK,
277. Dok. 198
(JK,
320), recording Hitler’s resignation on 16 February 1921, must be regarded as a forgery.
    162 . Tyrell,
Trommler,
123.
    163 .
JK,
438.
    164 .Tyrell,
Trommler,
126–8, 130. Hitler’s ultimatum to the party committee of 26 July 1921, printed in
JK,
445 (Dok.266), is a forgery.
    165 .
JK,
446.
    166 . Deuerlein,
Aufstieg,
138–41;
JK,
446–7; Tyrell,
Trommler,
128–30.
    167 .
JK,
439–44; Tyrell,
Trommler,
129 and 264 n.506.
    168 . See Tyrell, 130–50, for an examination of the new statutes.
    169 .
VB
, 4 August 1921, 3.
    170 .
VB
, 4 August 1921, 3.
CHAPTER 6 : THE ‘DRUMMER’
    1 . Rudolf Pechel,
Deutscher Widerstand,
Erlenbach/Zurich, 1947, 280.
    2 . Cit. Auerbach, ‘Hitlers politische Lehrjahre’, 29; Tyrell,
Trommler,
117.
    3 . Bernd Weisbrod, ‘Gewalt in der Politik. Zur politischen Kultur in Deutschland zwischen den beiden Weltkriegen’,
Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht,
43 (1992), 392–404, here esp. 392–5. See also George L. Mosse,
Fallen Soldiers,
New York/Oxford, 1990, ch.8; and Robert G.L. Waite,
Vanguard of Nazism. The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918–1923,
Cambridge, Mass., 1952.
    4 . Weisbrod, 393; Peter Longerich,
Die braunen Bataillone. Geschichte der SA,
Munich, 1989, 12. Detailed accounts of the Einwohnerwehr are presented by Hans Fenske,
Konservativismus und Rechtsradikalismus in Bayern nach 1918,
Bad Homburg/Berlin/Zurich, 1969, ch.5, 76–112; Karl Schwend,
Bayern zwischen Monarchie und Diktatur,
Munich, 1954, 159–70; and, especially, David Clay Large,
The Politics of Law and Order: A History of the Bavarian Einwohnerwehr, 1918–1921,
Philadelphia, 1980.
    5 . See Fenske, 148–59; Hoegner,
Die verratene Republik,
131; and Longerich,
Die braunen Bataillone,
14, for ‘Consul’. The figures for the numbers of political murders are taken from Ralf Dreier and Wolfgang Sellert (eds.),
Recht und Justiz im ‘Dritten Reich’,
Frankfurt am Main, 1989, 328; most of the murders were leniently dealt with by the courts compared with the far fewer (twenty-two in all) committed by members of left-wing parties.
    6 . Deuerlein,
Aufstieg,
143–4.
    7 . Deuerlein,
Aufstieg,
142; Fenske, 89–108.
    8 . Georg Franz-Willing,
Ursprung der Hitlerbewegung, 1919–1912,
2nd edn, Preußisch Oldendorf, 1974, 62–3 and n.15a.
    9 . Based on: Longerich,
Die braunen Bataillone,
12–14, 23–4; Hoegner, 129–33; Harold J. Gordon,
Hitler and the Beer Hall Putsch,
Princeton, 1972, 88–92; Spindler, i.462–4; Fenske, 143–72; Large,
Where Ghosts Walked,
142–6.
    10 . See Auerbach, ‘Hitlers politische Lehrjahre’, 35.
    11 . Longerich,
Die braunen Bataillone,
22; Bennecke, 26, implies that the ‘hall protection’ began with the Hofbräuhaus meeting on 24 February 1920; Franz-Willing,
Ursprung,
206, suggests that it went back even earlier, to the Eberlbräu meetingin October 1919. It is too early at these dates, however, to speak of anything more than the taking of obvious precautions at big meetings to have strong-arm supporters at the ready to combat the expected violent disturbances from