Alsace-Lorraine Since 1870

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALSACE-LORRAINE SINCE 1870

CHAPTER I

GERMANY’S CLAIMS TO ALSACE-LORRAINE

THE CLAIMS

When Germany wrested Alsace-Lorraine from France in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871, she defended herself on four grounds: first, that the provinces belonged to her by right of former possession; second, that the natural boundary between her and France was the Vosges; third, that the Alsatians were Germans by race; fourth, that the Alsatians were Germans by language.

A brief examination of these contentions will show to what extent they may properly be invoked by Germany in justification of her action.

I

Former Possession

It is true that Alsace-Lorraine did not always form a part of France, but the incorporation of portions of this territory in the French nation began as far back as 1552, when Metz was ceded to Henry II by the German Protestant princes.

German historians know, but they conveniently ignore the fact, that there was no Reichsland, no Elsass-Lothringen, before Prussia seized the country in 1871; there was no province Alsace, no province Lorraine until the mosaic of principalities, bishoprics, free cities, republics, seigniories, etc., which comprised the Imperial possessions on the west bank of the Rhine, was organized under French administration. Some parts of the country were gained by what we should today call conquest, which was the universally accepted method of aggrandizement at the time; one very important region came voluntarily into the French nation¹; in no part of the country was there any serious resistance, and in no part of the country was there at any time from the moment of annexation any serious opposition to French government. There was a certain amount of friction, it is true, due almost exclusively to the natural indignation of the Protestant population of Alsace at the aggressive tactics of French Catholics bent on conversion. But whatever animosity existed resulted not at all from a feeling that Germans were kin and French aliens, not at all from resentment at being torn from the Holy Roman Empire; it resulted, rather, from France’s encroachment on their rights as independent entities under the vague sovereignty of an Emperor who remained far away and was utterly indifferent to their affairs, provided the tribute was regularly paid into the Imperial coffers.

During the time that Alsace was under the sway of the Empire she was the battleground of Europe. The Empire’s hold was tenuous indeed, never extending to the point of protecting the land against the successive incursions of Armagnacs, English, Burgundians, Austrians, Hungarians, Spaniards, Swedes. France promised protection, prosperity, happiness, and kept her word until the tragic spoliation of 1871.

Germany never possessed Alsace-Lorraine. The land was within the confines of the Holy Roman Empire, but so were Holland, Belgium and Switzerland. The dominion of the Emperor over all this territory was merely nominal at best, illusory in fact, since he did not guarantee protection, the first duty of a suzerain. The people looked upon themselves as citizens of their local unit, free city, bishopric, seigniory, and they never considered themselves Germans, subjects of an Austrian Emperor.

It was without justification that William, King of Prussia in 1870, claimed the heritage of the Holy Roman Empire. If anything as unsubstantial as the Holy Roman Empire, a piece of antiquarianism hardly more venerable than ridiculous, as Lord Bryce said of it, can be inherited, certainly it should have fallen to Austria, as Austrian historians have maintained, since it was, if it was the heritage of anybody, the heritage of the Hapsburgs. During the last four hundred years of its existence, the Empire had been ruled by Hapsburgs, with only two exceptions: Charles VII of Bavaria (1742–1745) and Francis I of Lorraine (1745–1765).² It had long outlived reality when it breathed its last gasp in 1806. Bismarck resuscitated it in 1871, thereby proving himself to be a maker, not only of present and future history, but also of past history. The Holy Roman Empire was German when German meant Austrian. Suddenly in 1866 Austria was driven out of Germany and German came to mean Prussian, or something very similar. Then Bismarck, with an effrontery which seems to have hoodwinked the world, placed the crown of the long-since defunct Austrian Holy Roman Empire upon the Prussian head of William I.

Germans, with their customary confidence in the authority of a German ipse dixit, still really believe in the substantiality of the necromancy by which a dead Austrian Empire became a living German (or Prussian) Empire. But occasionally an independent dares to kick over the traces of sacred German-made tradition and give the lie to Treitschke and Sybel. Such for instance is Maximilian Harden, the enfant terrible of Pan-Germanism, who declared only the other day: "What the Chancellor said about the history of Alsace-Lorraine is not true. The Germanic Empire [i.e., Germanic-Austrian], composed as it was of countries inhabited by Celts, Germans and Frenchmen, had nothing in common with ours."³ (Quoted by the Literary Digest, March 9, 1918, p. 20.)

Germany has, then, on historical grounds, by right of former possession, not the slightest claim to Alsace-Lorraine. The country was never German, and the people were never German citizens.

II

Natural Boundary

Germany claimed in 1870 that the natural boundary between her and France was the Vosges. It is, of course, indisputable that the natural boundary between central and western Europe is the Rhine. Cæsar tells us that Gaul is bounded on the east by the Rhine, and for the first five centuries of the Christian era the Alsatians (Celts) found the Rhine the only safe barrier against the inevitable invasions of the German barbarians. During the centuries of French administration, the Rhine still served as a natural boundary. Furthermore, the Germans at Frankfort in 1871 did not apply their doctrine of a natural barrier with great rigour: in certain localities they successfully claimed some slopes west of the crest of the Vosges.

No one can take this German plea seriously. The Vosges are the natural boundary between Alsace and France, the Rhine is the natural boundary between Alsace and Germany. The sole question to decide is whether Alsace is German or French.

III

Race

Wilser, in an article in the Centralblatt für Anthropologie, expresses the generally accepted view that the safest ethnic sign is the shape of the skull. Ranke, in Der Mensch, declares that one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric craniology and archeology is that of the Germans Ecker and Lindenschmidt, who showed that the early Teutons all had dolichocephalic skulls. On the other hand, the Celtic skull was brachy-cephalic. Blind has demonstrated that in Celtic times Alsace was inhabited by a people of absolute ethnic purity, characterized by an exceedingly clear brachy-cephalism. His study of the ossuaries of the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries shows that up to this time there is no change, and he concludes that the race is still ethnically pure. Investigations of Blind, Schwalbe and others have proved that the Alsatian skull of today is pronouncedly brachycephalic, even more so, perhaps, than that of the earliest known Celtic inhabitants of Alsace. The colour of hair and eyes shows, too, a decided predominance of the non-German types. (Batiffol, in Revue hebdomadaire, February 9, 1918.)

Thus German professors have shown by one of their nation’s favourite sciences that there is no foundation for Germany’s ethnic claim to Alsace. The admixture of Teutonic blood, due to invastion and immigration, has not in the slightest degree modified the pure Celtic strain in France’s lost province.

IV

Language

The reluctance of Americans to demand the restoration of Alsace-Lorraine to France is based very largely on the feeling that a common language is a natural bond of union.

Theobald Ziegler, professor at the University of Strasbourg, a Pan-German of the most pronounced type, says in Die Grenzboten, March, 1915, p. 393: What makes a nation . . . ? Not the feeling of race, nor the consciousness of belonging to the same stock, which is often lost in the uncertainty and obscurity of history; not the native soil, which may remain, even when a piece is transferred from one people to another as in the case of Alsace; not the language—one has only to think of Switzerland where three languages are spoken; not even a community of purpose, for this even a corporation possesses;—not any of these, but two centuries of history lived in common with the great nation of France have made Alsatians and Lorrainers Frenchmen.

If the Germans really believed in their criterion of language as a determining factor in nationality, they would restore North Schleswig, which they seized in 1866, to Denmark, they would restore to Poland the millions of Poles whom they hold in subjection, and they would invite Austria to cede Trent and Trieste to Italy.

Just as Germany interpreted the historic claim and the claim of a natural boundary to suit herself, so she applied the linguistic criterion: in parts of Alsace and in most of Lorraine the language of the people was French. Metz, the great city of Lorraine, had throughout all its history been entirely French, and when it was seized in 1871 it was as French as Paris. Germany took what she wanted; her only justification was the might of the sword.

In the greater part of Alsace the masses speak a German dialect; we shall see in a moment that they are not for that reason German.

A German professor of political economy said in 1900: "[In Alsace] the rural population speaks German, except in the upper valley of the Bruche and in some localities in the higher Vosges. German is the language of the lower middle-class in the cities (the petite bourgeoisie). The upper middle-class in the cities and the notables in the whole country prefer French, without giving up the dialect entirely, for they are obliged to use it in their relations with their servants and workmen." (Wittich, p. 782.)

So in Alsace all men of consequence prefer French. Furthermore, many stories are told of the pathetic efforts of humble Alsatian labourers to learn French, but it is practically impossible for them to do so, since for almost fifty years now it has been strictly forbidden to teach French in the elementary schools.

Even despite this proscription, the number of people speaking French in Alsace—of course there is no question of Lorraine, where the vast majority of the people, high and low, speak French—has steadily increased. A German writer, Karl Franzos, in a volume published in 1904, says:

"According to a census taken in 1866, during the reign of Napoleon III, a third of the population of Strasbourg could speak and write French; a second third could not write it but understood it and spoke it, at least a little; the remaining third used the dialect exclusively.

"People who are thoroughly acquainted with the present population, among others public officials and professors who ought to know, have affirmed to me that, so far as the indigenous inhabitants are concerned, these figures have been radically modified.

"Among the old Alsatians [that is, people born in Alsace, as distinguished from German Immigrants], who form seven-twelfths of the population, no longer a third but a half speaks and writes French. In the half which does not know how to write it, one person out of two understands it at least, imperfectly perhaps, but sufficiently to be able to express himself. Only a fourth of the indigenous population is completely ignorant of French.

Some people have thought that this phenomenon is not a reason for grief. But if you reflect that French is not taught in the schools and that this development has taken place during a generation of German domination, you will find in this fact ample matter for reflection. (Quoted by Florent-Matter, p. 193.)⁴

Official German figures corroborate this evidence of Alsace’s determination to remain French in the face of persecution. In 1895, 159,532 declared their maternal language to be French; in 1900 the number had leaped to 199,433, a gain of almost 40,000 in five years. And let it not be forgotten that these figures are certainly far below the truth, for a declaration of a preference for French immediately stamped a man as rebellious to German rule.⁵

The Journal de Genève comments as follows on the phenomenon which so saddened the good German, Franzos:

"Either the French populations are more prolific than the others or the children of German origin are absorbed in the French melting-pot to the extent of forgetting the language of their fathers. The first hypothesis is scarcely admissible; we are, therefore, in presence of the phenomenon described by the famous saying: Graecia capta ferocem victorem cepit. The Alsatians are not becoming Germans, the Germans are becoming Alsatians." (Quoted by Florent-Matter, p. 194.)⁶

In Alsace, then, French is still the language of the leading classes; and even the German Immigrants, or rather their children, are swelling the number of those speaking French.

The lower class speak a German dialect But they are not German, they never were Germans before they were won by conquest in 1870, they are French, they endeavour by every means to learn the French language, they have no love for Germany, and they demand now that they be allowed to return to the French fatherland.

"The propagators of the French genius in Alsace are first of all the notables . . . but also the lesser bourgeois of the cities, at least those who have had some education. (By far the most important social category in Alsace is formed by the lesser bourgeois of the cities, to whom correspond in the country the middle-class and lesser farmers.) The peasants and the workers in the factories remained, it is true, German in language and customs, but saw in French civilization the civilization of the world, and remained completely separated from the development of the German national genius." (Wittich, pp. 785–789.)

Thus a professor of political economy at the German University of Strasbourg, who knows Alsace thoroughly and has made one of the most profound studies yet published on the conflict of nationalities within that province, declares explicitly that not only the higher classes who have always been admittedly French, but all classes, high and low, whether they speak German or French, are at heart French, feel themselves at home in an atmosphere of French civilization, under French institutions, and look upon German Kultur as something alien.

Wittich continues: Today the Alsatians must retrace their steps on the road with great difficulty traversed, must ‘de-Gallicize’ themselves and develop to the maturity of the modern German intellectual culture a feeble and antique Germanism which has remained in them in embryonic form. It is extremely difficult to accomplish this, and a considerable extent of time is necessary, as well as an inclination to do it, which up to the present has been lacking. (Wittich, p. 806.)

The fact is that speaking German has not made the Alsatians German. Hostility to Germany since 1870 has been most violent, not in French-speaking Lorraine, but in German-speaking Alsace.⁷

The great Alsatian artists, Hansi and Zislin, both of whom were constantly persecuted by the German authorities for their pro-French tendencies, both of whom are serving under the French flag today, wrote in the Alsatian German dialect, and their supporters were the common people of Alsace, the German-speaking population. Zislin was before the war the editor of Dur’s Elsass, published in the Alsatian dialect and consequently expressing the political and social views of those who could not read the French newspapers and magazines. Dur’s Elsass was just as pro-French and anti-German as the law permitted. It was under constant surveillance and was frequently prosecuted by the authorities. In February, 1908, it demanded autonomy for Alsace-Lorraine and took its stand with these words: We say without hesitation, and we repeat it to whoever cares to hear, every time we have an opportunity, that we are entirely destitute of those German sentiments which the Prussians would like to impose upon us. (Florent-Matter, p. 157.)

The Alsatian populace speaks the language of Zislin’s Dur’s Elsass and of Hansi’s Professor Knatschke, and it proved by its support of these productions that it cherishes the attitude toward France and Germany therein expressed.⁸

The popular theatre, too, gives an accurate indication of the temper of the masses. The reception given to the plays produced in Alsatian-German at the Alsatian Theatre of Strasbourg and at the similar houses in Colmar and Mulhouse shows that Alsatians speak a German dialect indeed, but that they have no love for their conquerors.⁹

Colmar is in the heart of German-speaking Alsace; furthermore, it numbers in its population a very large portion of Immigrants. According to the census of 1910 there were in Colmar 34,480 Alsatians and 8,219 Germans. But Colmar, despite all this, has been the centre of pro-French feeling in Alsace.

In 1914 and during the nine years preceding, Daniel Blumenthal was Mayor of Colmar.