Third Reich???

General WWII era German military discussion that doesn't fit someplace more specific.
User avatar
schwerepunkt
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 5:09 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Third Reich???

Post by schwerepunkt » Sun Jan 12, 2003 7:51 pm

What were the first and Second Reichs. I'm guessing that the Holy Roman Reich in Austria counts as one of them, Charlemagne (or Karl der Grosse) being a German and it lasting for close to 1000 years, however i've really no idea of the other, unless it's the Romans.
"You are educated when you have the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or self-confidence."
Robert Frost

User avatar
mikerock
Contributor
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 11:48 pm
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada

Post by mikerock » Sun Jan 12, 2003 8:23 pm

Greetings,

I believe that the Holy Roman Empire was the first 'Reich,' and Imperial Germany of late 19th and early 20th century was the second Reich.

--Mike

User avatar
Abwehr
Contributor
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 7:16 pm

Post by Abwehr » Mon Jan 13, 2003 5:00 pm

It was all pretty arbitrary anyways.

The Holy Roman Empire was hardly a "Reich".

User avatar
RF
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 4:17 am
Location: U.S.

1st & 2nd Reich (for what it's worth)

Post by RF » Mon Jan 13, 2003 10:49 pm

Dear Fellow Forum Members,

The so called "1st Reich" was under Otto, son of Charlemagne in the 900's, aka "Holy Roman Empire". The 2nd "Reich" was in 1871 under Kaiser Wilhelm (via Bismarck) in the newly founded German Empire. The 3rd Reich... well you know the rest of the story.

Regards,

RF

Paul Hanson
Contributor
Posts: 235
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 3:33 pm

1st Reich

Post by Paul Hanson » Tue Jan 14, 2003 4:42 pm

It wasn't Holy and it wasn't Roman, either.

PH

jo
New Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2002 3:31 am

Post by jo » Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:27 pm

Hi

the first reich was called "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nationen"
("Holy Roman Reich of German Nations"-my translation).
the last kaiser of the first reich was Franz II in 1806.
the second reich was built up in 1871. The king of "Preussen", Wilhelm I., became "Kaiser". It ended in 1918.

there was no holy german reich in austria. This area was called dukedome of austria. later in 1617 Ferdinand became king of "Böhmen" and austria. The last Kaiser of the first german reich became the first kaiser of austria in 1806. This reich existed until 1918.

greetings from germany

paul

they, especially the pope, called the reich "holy" and "roman" cause the german reich should be the successer of the roman empire and the defender of the Christianity.

Fallschirmjager
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:27 am

The Holy Roman Empire/The First Reich was Teutonic

Post by Fallschirmjager » Fri Jan 17, 2003 1:06 pm

The First Reich, was formed by Pope Hadrian II and Charlemagne. To protect Rome and Christian Europe from Islamic and Pagan attack. Charlemagne was of Germanic blood and speech, and shared some characteristics of his people- strength of body, courage of spirit, pride of race. His mother tongue was old Teutonic, an early from of high German and knew Latin, and understood Greek. Aachen, was his primary capital, it has always been a Germanic city.

He received from Pope Hadrian II an urgent appeal for aid against the pagan Lombard Desiderius, who was invading the papal states. Charlemagne besieged and took Pavia, assumed the crown of Lombardy. He was made accepted the role of protector of the Church in all her temporal powers. Thus he became The First Kaiser of the First Reich. (Kaiser is German for Emperor, Reich is Empire)

A French fairy tale:
In a battle at Roncesvalles in Navarre, a force of Basques pounced down upon the rear guard of Charlemagne’s army, and slaughtered nearly every man in it (778); there the noble Hruodland died, who would become three centuries later the hero of France’s most famous poem, the Chanson de Roland. In English it is called The Song of Roland. Roland was like his Lord Charlemagne, was Teutonic not French.

Actually all northern European Christians were called Franks.

User avatar
Stefan
Banned
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:54 am
Location: Deutschland

Post by Stefan » Sat Jan 18, 2003 8:17 pm

I wrote an extensive essay on the history and significance of the Reiche over in the Soldatenheim (Prussia topic), but it has mysteriously disappeared (deleted for some unknown reason, one would suppose). In any case, I am not willing to write that sermon all over again. It will be sufficient to note that the First Reich (Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation) is generally considered to have existed from 911 (election and coronation of König Konrad I.) until 1806 (Reichsdeputationshauptschluß and abdication of Kaiser Franz II.) and the Second Reich from 1871 (proclamation of Prussian König Wilhelm I. as German Kaiser following the Franco-German war) until 1918 (abdictation of Kaiser Wilhelm II. following the revolution and the armistice). It should be noted that the Weimarer Republik referred to itself as "Deutsches Reich" too.

Fallschirmjager
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:27 am

Reichs & The Holy Roman Empires

Post by Fallschirmjager » Sun Jan 19, 2003 12:50 pm

Abwehr wrote:It was all pretty arbitrary anyways.

The Holy Roman Empire was hardly a "Reich".
In German, Reich: “Empire”, Kaiser: “Emperor”

The First Reich, in Latin (Sacrum Romanum Imperiumthei), varying complex of lands in western and central Europe ruled over first by Frankish and then by German kings for 10 centuries, from Charlemagne's coronation in 800 until the renunciation of the imperial title in 1806.

The Second Reich led by the Prussian Hohenzollerns. From unification of Germany in 1871, to 1918 The King of Prussia became the Kaiser.

Third Reich official Nazi designation for the regime in Germany from January 1933 to May 1945, as the presumed successor of the medieval and early modern Holy Roman Empire of 800 to 1806 (the First Reich) and the German Empire from 1871 to 1918 (the Second Reich).

User avatar
k-pp
Contributor
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2002 9:49 am
Location: London, United kingdom

Post by k-pp » Sun Jan 19, 2003 3:01 pm

The words Kaiser and Tsar derive from the word Caesar.

Fallschirmjager
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:27 am

Danke

Post by Fallschirmjager » Sun Jan 19, 2003 3:20 pm

k-pp wrote:The words Kaiser and Tsar derive from the word Caesar.
Very true my bad mistake. I belive I have the Reich question correct, true?

Ah, what of Khan as to Ceasar?

User avatar
k-pp
Contributor
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2002 9:49 am
Location: London, United kingdom

Post by k-pp » Sun Jan 19, 2003 3:45 pm

Fallschirmjaeger!

I wasn't correcting you; I was just throwing in a titbit.

I can't remember off the top of my head where the word Khan is derived from (bad memory), but I don't think it's Caesar.

Fallschirmjager
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:27 am

You are correct

Post by Fallschirmjager » Mon Jan 20, 2003 11:49 am

Ceasar is Kaiser & Tzar, I think Khan, also. See you are correct.

User avatar
Kapuziner
Supporter
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:56 pm
Location: Deutschland
Contact:

Caesar = Kaiser = Zar

Post by Kapuziner » Tue Jan 21, 2003 5:18 pm

well, and "KHAN", does anybody remember the old guy named "Dschingis"-Khan, just a few miles eastwards, on that edge of earth, where the sun is rising...
In short Khan has nothing to do with Gaius Julius.

But thats not so important; the common knowledge about the "heiliges römisches Reich deutscher Nation", which means the knowledge of roundabout 1000 years of europe and history of the "modern world" makes me suffering.... I hope modern united europe will grow slowly to get time to learn.

salve populus et ora

Yves
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2002 11:26 am

Post by Yves » Wed Jan 22, 2003 7:31 am

Charlemagne was crowned emperor of the Romans by the pope, by that time there was still officially a Roman Emperor in the capital of the Roman Empire, Byzantium....

This issue was to determine who was the official successor of the Roman empires and thus who should rule the roman and christian world or what was left of it.

The political shift also resulted in religious shift with the division between w
Western latin Christianity and Eastern Orthodox Christianity, But the two halves of the Roman Empire had been drifting apart for quite some time now.....

The Muslim conquest of most of the Eastern Empire marked the end of the last serious efforts by the Eastern Roman Empire to reunite the Empire and accelerated the seperation.

After the fall of the Byzantines the Moscovite Russians put their own claim as being the successors of Rome: Moscow the third Rome. Two Romes have fallen the third one is solid there will be no fourth....

Thus interestingly Both the Germans and Russians which had never been part of the Roman Empire somehow put claims on the successions of Rome.

The Holy German Empire, which was the first Reich, that eventually emerged from that was never really Roman and had little substance. It had merely been a move by the Pope still in Rome to reject the authority of the emperor in Byzantium and to secure the authority of the Roman Church over the German held territories. It never achieved any real political unity and disolved over time.

By the time of the German second Reich, there was little link left with Rome except for the name of Empire and the title of Kaiser which came from the Roman Cesars (for the Russians it was Tsar) as already quoted. For the Third Reich, Nazi ideology had no claims on Roman descent. This theme was left to Benito to exploit.

Soviet Russia had also given up claims about Byzantine/Roman succession, though the basic Russian objective of a move towards Constantinople and the Balkans remained present in Soviet Policy.

Yves.

Post Reply