Friedrich Christoph von Saldern - a nobleman of the Mark of Brandenburg.

In the year 1793 a slim volume was published by the Karl Matzdorff bookstore in Berlin, entitled: »Character traits of the Prussian General-Lieutenant von Sattlern with practical remarks about his military deeds and his private life«. The author of the biography was the former Reformed regimental chaplain, later civilian pastor, consistory councillor and inspector in Magdeburg, Carl Daniel Küster. Küster was an eyewitness and commentator of the first three campaigns in Prussia’s seven-year existential struggle for the possession of Silesia — a theologian as war reporter. As a civilian pastor he developed a rich journalistic activity and over time published 25 historical, pedagogical and theological writings. Besides the »Officier-Lesebuch« in six volumes1), a remarkable eyewitness account of the night attack at Hochkirch2), Küster has above all left us the aforementioned »Character traits ...«.

At the center of this life description stands an interesting military personality of the late Frederician epoch in the person of Friedrich Christoph von Saldern. Saldern’s life path and the intellectual foundations of his actions cast a telling light on the values prevailing in the officer corps of the time.

1) Officier-Lesebuch of historical-military content with interspersed interesting anecdotes, Berlin 1793-97.

2) Fragment from the Champagne-life of a Prussian field preacher in the ten weeks before the battle at Hochkirch on 14 October 1758 until Christmas of the same year. Berlin 1790.

Saldern was born on 2.VI.1719 in Carmzow in the Prenzlau district. The parents were the Prussian captain and company commander in Infantry Regiment Schlaberndorf (No. 25, Anklam, Demmin, Strasburg in Uckermark) Otto Ludolph von Saldern (1686-1753) and Lucretia Tugendreich von Holzendorf (1700-1728). On his father’s side the family originated from the Hildesheim and Brunswick regions (Lower Saxony), but had already taken root in the Mark Brandenburg in the 16th century.

Friedrich Christoph, since 1733 (?)3) enrolled as a Junker in Infantry Regiment Anhalt-Zerbst (No. 8, Stettin), received the ensign commission on 7.VIII.1735 and thereby entry into the old Prussian officer corps. After he had already attracted positive attention at the review of the Pomeranian regiments in 1735, the over-six-foot tall, young and promising officer was transferred by Friedrich Wilhelm I (1688-1740) on 12.I.1739 to the King’s Regiment (No. 6, Potsdam) as second lieutenant (commission dated 23.X.1735)4). After Friedrich II’s accession to the throne (31.V.1740) and the reformation of the guard units, Saldern transferred as first lieutenant to the II Battalion of the Guard Regiment (No. 15 II/III, Potsdam). After the First Silesian War (1740-42) he was promoted on 18.VIII.1743 to staff captain and in 1744, shortly before the outbreak of the Second Silesian War (1744-45), became captain and company commander. In the wake of the Battle of Hohenfriedberg (4.VI.1745) Saldern received the Order Pour le Mérite5). As major (since 24.VIII.1749) and battalion commander in the Guard Regiment he marched into the Seven Years’ War (1756-63), where he earned particular distinction in the battles of Hochkirch (14.X.1758), Leignitz (15.VIII.1760) and Torgau (3.XI.1760). He demonstrated his organizational abilities in the reorganization of the army supply service in 1760. Since 1.VI.1757 lieutenant colonel and commander of the Guard Regiment, he was on 6.III.1760 appointed as major general (commission dated 17.IX.1758) and made chief of the Guard Grenadier Battalion (No. 6, Potsdam).

3) According to other accounts Saldern only entered in 1735 and indeed immediately as an ensign into Infantry Regiment No. 8; cf.: König, Biographisches Lexikon ..., Vol. III, p. 342 and Jähns, Geschichte der Kriegswissenschaften ..., Vol. III, p. 2529.

4) The transmitted "Verzeichnis Wie die Herrn Officiers seit Stiftung bey dem Regiment bis zum Jahre 1783 abgegangen" of Infantry Regiment No. 8 dates Saldern’s departure to December 1738 and adds: "came to the King’s Regiment because of his height, later became General-Lieutenant and governor in Magdeburg." The departure list also names under the same No. 313 his brother Captain Hennig Siegfried von Saldern, who received his dismissal in 1762.

5) According to Küster, Character traits ..., ibid., p. 174, and subsequently according to Lippe (Ernst Graf zur Lippe, Friedrich Christoph von Saldern in: same, Militaria from the Time of King Frederick the Great, 1866, p. 90) Saldern received the Order Pour le Mérite for merits in the Battle of Leuthen (5.VII.1757), which Priesdorff corrected in his biography of Saldern (Kurt v. Priesdorff, Saldern, Hamburg 1943, p. 20). Priesdorff apparently bases this on the information in: Lehmann, Gustav, Die Ritter des Ordens pour le merite, Vol. I 1740-1811, Berlin 1913, p. 29 (same No. 211).

After the peace settlement of Hubertusburg (15.II.1763) Sattlern, simultaneously appointed lieutenant general on 12.XII.1766, succeeded the voluntarily retiring General-Field Marshal_Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick (1721-1792) as general inspector of the Magdeburg infantry inspection, took over his now vacant infantry regiment (No. 5, Magdeburg), became governor of Magdeburg and a knight of the Order of the Black Eagle. Under his aegis the Magdeburg inspection became beyond the borders of Prussia the epitome of old Prussian drill proficiency, was regarded as consummate in matters of tactics, and the perfectionist Saldern advanced to be the "king’s drillmaster" (Priesdorff). Four requests for leave due to his dilapidated physical condition were rejected by King Frederick the Great with the remark of his indispensability to the army and thus to the state; thus Saldern fulfilled the duties of his position to the end and, like the king himself, consumed himself in long service. With his death on 14.III.1785 in Magdeburg Frederick the Great lost one of his last military confidants.

Saldern was not only an excellent practitioner but also a teacher and theorist of stature. His military-theoretical writings prove this. The »Tactical Principles ...«6), published in 1781 in Frankfurt in the first and in 1786 in Dresden in a second edition, show him as a significant representative of evolution tactics, as a complete connoisseur of Frederician combat and troop leadership and as a preserver of the legacy of King Frederick William I and of Prince Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau (1676-1747). Sattlern was not an innovator; he remained trapped in the conventional military thinking of his time. The upheavals in the tactical field in Prussia were left to a later generation under the impression of the catastrophe of Jena and Auerstedt (14.X.1806). In retrospect on the decay and decline of the old Prussian army Saldern was ascribed a share of culpability for ossification and stagnation as a main representative of the art of evolutions and "review tactics", a judgment which is mainly based on the writings of Georg Heinrich von Berenhorst (1733-1814) and is to be rejected in view of the fact that Saldern died 20 years before the confrontation of the aging old-Prussian state with the young French empire.

6) Tactical Principles and Instruction for military evolutions ..., Frankfurt 1781, new edition Dresden 1786. For the topic complex "Saldern as military author" see above all: Jähns, Max, History of the Science of War principally in Germany, Munich and Leipzig 1891, Vol. III, p. 2528 ff. Saldern’s tactics are particularly appreciated by: Malachowski, D. v., Sharp Tactics and Review Tactics in the 18th and 19th Centuries, Berlin 1892, p. 32 ff. — known is Frederick the Great’s admonishing remark on the occasion of a Magdeburg review: "Saldern, stop. That is everything and surpasses everything that can be done in tactics."

Besides his qualities as a troop leader, trainer and tactician, contemporary literature especially praises Saldern’s qualities as a man and superior, the moral aspects of his work. In his writings he pleaded for humane treatment of people, rejected "severity" as a means of education in recruit training as "unnatural and inhumane"7), and the private soldier was no longer called "Kerl" but "Pursche" (manservant)8). Saldern was thus not an exception in the officer corps. When assessing the treatment of people in the old Prussian army it must be considered that the much-maligned Prussian drill was necessary with regard to the tactical peculiarities of the old Prussian army9) and that strict disciplining was required by the social composition of the ranks. Punitive power was at the same time restricted by a series of prohibitions and directives in the relevant regulations (reglements, edicts, instructions ...). These norms served to prevent excessive flogging and to preserve the trained professional soldier as a valuable "capital" in his physical fitness, to prevent discharge due to health damage or desertion. In addition, patriarchal thinking, religious and humanistic values of many regimental commanders, commanders and company commanders did not exclude arbitrariness, but at least mitigated it and set narrow limits to the brutality of individuals. Friedrich Christoph von Saldern thus stands representative of a large number of old-Prussian officers for whom religiosity was a recognizable guiding motif in thought and action, obliging them to care for their subordinates.

7) Jany, Curt, History of the Prussian Army from the 15th Century to 1914, reprint Osnabrück 1967, Vol. III, p. 59.

8) Priesdorff, Saldern, ibid., p. 94.

9) An increased rate of fire achieved by constant training, the extended range of the longer rifle models, as well as the infantry formation reduced from 4 to 3 ranks and the remarkable maneuverability primarily made the superiority of the old Prussian foot troops in

Alongside this aspect of Saldern’s work, alongside measures of care and health promotion for the "conservation" of soldiers, alongside his merit in safeguarding their economic interests within the framework of the company economy10) or as a Freiwächter11), Saldern also devoted himself to soldiers’ wives and children, a group to which he remained attached since his role as overseer of the military orphanage in Potsdam12). Seeking to link and expand civil and military poor relief, he made provisions for the accommodation, feeding and medical care of soldiers’ wives and children13). This low-income group was always at risk in its economic livelihood in the absence of a state social insurance system and, particularly in the event of the household head’s death or mobilization, dependent on state support or self-help.

10) The company economy as a central concept of the old-Prussian military economy is a relic from the time of mercenary armies and designates in the 18th century the remainder of self-provisioning of the units by their holders = chiefs; after 1763 their rights and thus their financial leeway were further considerably restricted.

11) Freiwächter (city on leave) as opposed to the country on leave is the soldier (usually a foreigner and professional) within the garrison released from (guard) duty without pay; he pursues a private commercial activity.

12) Founded by King Frederick William I (1713-40); construction began in 1722. Institution for the accommodation, upbringing and training of soldiers’ children modeled on the Francke foundations in Halle. For the "welfare measures for soldiers’ wives and children in the old Prussian army" see in particular the author’s article in: Zeitschrift für Heereskunde, No. 328, 1986, pp. 139 ff..

14) Reglement for the Royal Prussian Infantry, Berlin 1743, pp. 603/604; for the relationship of the military to the urban environment cf. also: Schwieger, Klaus, Military and the Bourgeoisie. On the social formative power of the Prussian military system in the 18th century, in: Blasius, Dirk (ed.), Prussia in German History, Königstein/Taunus 1980, pp. 179 ff

At the same time the headstrong military proletariat formed a social burden for the municipality, especially through the quartering of married soldiers with their families; after 1763 these, however, were increasingly barracked. Saldern’s benevolence and charity can be explained on the one hand by his official responsibility as inspector and regimental chief for the members of the military colony entrusted to him, and on the other hand by the intellectual currents of the time: Humanism and the Enlightenment sketched a new image of man, made contemporaries more sensitive to social hardships in the lives of their fellow human beings; at the same time Pietism as a religious revival movement demanded an active Christianity based on the Christian principle of charity. The education of soldiers’ children in regimental schools became customary, for it ultimately benefited the regiment itself; the soldiers’ sons were the recruits of tomorrow.

Küster, belonging to the bourgeoisie, emphasizes in his »Character traits ...« above all the close relationship of Lieutenant General von Saldern as governor of Magdeburg to the population of the garrison and expressly points to the mutual dependencies between the military and the citizenry. A harmonious coexistence of military and civilian spheres was not the rule in the old-Prussian state, for although the military represented a not insignificant factor in the economic life of the garrison, it also burdened civilian everyday life with extensive security and control measures, quartering, excesses and their public punishments. At the same time the military had considerable competences that encompassed not only purely military but also civil areas (such as influence on the "tax on bread, beer and meat" and the control of "measures and weights"14). The community, long since only an indirect link in the state administration, had to accept further incursions into the remaining vestige of self-administration. This made friction preprogrammed. At the same time the military also assumed tasks for the welfare of the garrison, such as fire protection, market supervision and other functions to maintain public safety and order. According to Küster, Saldern discharged his weighty position as governor of the city of Magdeburg impartially and without prejudice, sought contact with the citizenry and aimed for a friendly atmosphere, while excesses committed by military personnel were punished severely. That this concord between governor and citizenry was not self-evident is proven for example by the conflicts in Breslau, Halle, Hamm and Stettin.

One episode of Lieutenant General von Saldern’s life is of particular interest but also presents puzzles to the modern observer: this is the Hubertusburg commission of the year 1761. In the year before, the unprotected capital of Prussia, Berlin, had for a few days been occupied for the second time15) by a hostile detachment consisting of Russian, Austrian and Saxon-Polish troops. The royal commander was meanwhile far away in Silesia opposite the Austrian main army under Field Marshal Leopold, Count von Daun (1705-1766). Before the occupiers had to give way to the approaching relief force, the city was levied with a contribution, the arsenal looted, and in the foundry, the mint, the powder factory and at the rifle factories in Potsdam and Spandau — destructions were inflicted; the palaces at Nieder-Schönhausen, Friedrichsfelde and Charlottenburg were ransacked. According to Jany16) the excesses were mainly committed by Austrian hussars and Saxon-Polish uhlans. Irreplaceable works of art were lost, among them the antique collection formerly belonging to Cardinal de Polignac. On this Count Ernst Ahasverus Heinrich von Lehndorff (1727-1803) writes in his secret diary under 19.X.1760: "I cannot stop thinking about the Polignac statues that were destroyed in Charlottenburg Palace. Admired by the ancient Greeks, honored by the Romans and spared by the Goths and Huns and all barbarian peoples, they have now finally found their grave here by our hands through the Austrians and Saxons."17)

15) Berlin had already been occupied in October 1757 by an Austrian raiding corps, cf. inter alia: The Advance of the Austrian General Haddik against Berlin from 12 to 22 October 1757, in: Yearbook for Army and Navy, Vol. 27, pp. 91 ff.

16) Jany, ibid., Vol. II, p. 574, cf. also: Great General Staff (ed.), The Seven Years’ War 1756-63, Vol. 13, Berlin 1914, p. 272. Henri de Catt suspects that the plunderings were reprisals for the devastation of the Brühl palaces (Schüßler, Willy (ed.), Frederick the Great. Conversations with Henri de Catt, Munich 1981, p. 502).

17) quoted after: Kuenheim, Haug v. (ed.), From the Diaries of Count Lehndorff, Munich 1984, p. 129.

The excesses had consequences, for in the following year King Frederick II retaliated with the systematic plundering of the Saxon hunting lodge Hubertusburg near Leipzig. According to Küster it was Saldern to whom the execution of this delicate task was entrusted by the king. Saldern, however, refused to obey, declining the risky commission with the words "Your Majesty, have the grace, that is against my honor and oath!"18) — ethical arguments were his motive. He then fell into disgrace, became ill and left the army for a longer leave, but returned in the spring, took command and was fully rehabilitated by the rank promotions of 1766. Under Colonel Karl Theophilus Guischard(t), called Quintus Icilius (1724-1775), free troops finally plundered the splendid, richly furnished building with criminal energy all too thoroughly.

18) Küster, Character traits ..., p. 42.

So where is the problem hidden? The fate of the electoral hunting lodge is without doubt — it was robbed, and the actor who acted on the king’s orders is the less-than-honorable Colonel Guischard(t). What cannot be determined with certainty, however, is who actually refused the king? In Küster’s account Saldern shines in bright light; the classics Preuß, Carlyle and Kugler follow him, Lippe concurs. Archenholz and Jany do not even mention the event. One is puzzled to note, however, that another name is associated with the Hubertusburg affair:

F.A.L. v. d. Marwitz (1777-1837) gives in his biography19) the leading role in the conflict between subordination and conception of honor to an ancestor, namely his uncle, Colonel Johann Friedrich v. d. Marwitz. Like Saldern, Marwitz also refused participation and personal enrichment in the disreputable reprisal, emphasizing his status as commander of the distinguished cuirassier regiment Gendarmes (K 10, Berlin). Having fallen into disgrace, he voluntarily left the army in 1769 and retired to his estates20).

19) Meusel, Friedrich (ed.), Friedrich August Ludwig von der Marwitz. A nobleman of the Mark in the age of the Wars of Liberation, Berlin 1908, Vol. 1, p. 11. In Friedersdorf his descendants placed a gravestone with the telling inscription: "Saw Frederick’s heroic age and fought with him in all his wars. Chose disgrace where obedience did not bring honor.".

20) cf. Priesdorff, Kurt von, Soldierly Leadership, Vol. II, pp. 119 ff., v. d. Marwitz was re-employed on 1.IV.1778 as general intendant of the vivres and promoted to major general on 10.IV.1778.

Here a special kind of conception of honor becomes visible. This freedom in obedience is a way of thinking and acting that has little in common with the label of "blind obedience" which is often attached to the Prussian officer corps. Kluth21) has already pointed to the contradiction in the person — the question remains in the air: Saldern and/or Marwitz?

21) Kluth, Rolf, The Conception of Honor in the Prussian Army of the 18th Century, Diss. Berlin 1941, pp. 191 ff., cf. also: Leuschner, Hans, Frederick the Great. Time - Person - Impact, Gütersloh 1986, p. 87 and Schoeps, Hans-Joachim, Prussia. History of a State, Berlin n.d., p. 332 ...

21)  Kluth, Rolf, Die Ehrauffassung im Preussischen Heer des 18. Jahrhunderts, Diss. Berlin 1941, S. 191 ff, vergl. aber auch: Leuschner, Hans, Friedrich der Grosse. Zeit - Person - Wirkung, Gütersloh 1986, S. 87 und Schoeps, Hans-Joachim, Preussen. Geschichte eines Staates, Berlin o. J., S. 332 ...

Friedrich Christoph von Saldern’s birth, five years after the accession of Frederick William I, falls into the period of the "stylistic break" (Bleckwenn), the brusque departure from the corrupt misrule under King Frederick I (1657-1713) and his costly, lavish and opulent court life modeled on representation and imitating the magnificent court of Louis XIV (1638-1715). The period of substantive reorientation and economic as well as social restructuring in the deliberate formation of Prussian characteristics was followed under Frederick the Great by the spectacular and dramatic rise of the state "out of the sand" (Simon) into the circle of the European great powers. In the year before the death of the old king, the most significant and at the same time most contradictory Hohenzollern personality (17.VIII.1786), Saldern died in Magdeburg, a contemporary of the two essential epochs of formation (1713-40) and proving (1740-86) of the old Prussian state.