Laeso et invieto militi - the Old Prussian system for the care of disabled soldiers

In the 17th century the European armed forces developed in a long transitional process into standing armies and thus into state institutions. The standing army, the Miles perpetuus, was both a prerequisite for and an instrument of the absolute power of the princes; the soldier wore the king’s coat. With the emergence of standing armies, however, the problem of providing for soldiers no longer fit for service also arose. Various states made manifold efforts to solve this social question.

Model measures were taken in France; already under Louis XIV a genuine old-age provision for retired soldiers was introduced, and the foundation of the Hôtel des Invalides in Paris dates from 1674. In Austria-Hungary corresponding invalid houses were established in Vienna and Budapest in 1721. In Electoral Saxony discharged soldiers had been paid so-called abdankungsgelder since the early 17th century; over time these were converted into ongoing pension payments (provisions, from 1738 1 Thaler monthly). At the same time efforts were made to facilitate invalids’ engagement in trades and their settlement in villages. While invalid houses were not erected in Saxony, invalid companies existed there from 1726. These units, made up of soldiers no longer fit for service, were responsible for garrison duties at their stations, in particular standing guard posts, etc. The concentration of soldiers no longer fit for field service in certain units as a form of provision was also known in Bavaria: around 1650 an appropriate garrison company existed on the Rothenberg, expanded to battalion strength in 1758 and to regiment strength in 1771. In the Electorate of the Palatinate invalid companies were established from 1704 onward for guard duty in the electoral palaces and gardens. Hansen points to early forms of social insurance in Hanover and in the Principality of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorf. Württemberg, on the other hand, did not arrive at a regulated system of invalid care until quite late. Overall, however, the available financial means and accommodation options for invalids were inadequate; their situation is described at various times in different states consistently as poor.

The most significant army of the 18th century in relation to its material basis (territory, population, economic resources) was that of the young Prussian kingdom. In the three Silesian Wars it was to gain an almost legendary fame for bearing and superior maneuvering and drill skill. Given the tight constraints, support for invalids in militarily overstretched Prussia proved particularly problematic; the following lines will be devoted to the development of the invalid system with special consideration of the Frederician period¹.

The invalid system goes back to the time of the Great Elector (1640–88), who in individual cases granted pensions of grace for officers and “Gnadenthaler” for ranks and established various “Blessirten Companies”². Frederick I (1688–1713) expanded invalid provision and founded in 1705 (24.08.1705) the invalid fund, which was to accumulate capital for the construction of an invalid house. However, this plan was abandoned; from 1721 the fund’s assets were used to finance regular provision payments in the form of pensions and “Gnadenthaler.”

Frederick William I (1713–40) had already been involved in invalid affairs as crown prince; he acted at the leadership level of the aforementioned invalid fund. In connection with the accommodation of a wounded corporal he wrote on 09.02.1706 to Prince Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau that it “would be merciless not to take care of those who have lost healthy limbs before the enemy.” Based on this intention, Frederick William I improved and organized the provision facilities during his reign and sought primarily to increase the financial volume of the invalid fund. In 1714, alongside the “old bodyguard,” four further invalid companies existed³. In 1730 special provision was made for the invalid soldiers of the “King’s Regiment” through the foundation of the Corps of the Discharged or Guard Invalids (initially in Pritzerbe, from 1738 in Werder near Potsdam)⁴. According to the royal order of 28.08.1739 each of them received 2 Thalers monthly⁵. In 1729 the first of four country regiments was founded, whose cadres also served to provide for soldiers no longer fully fit for duty. Furthermore, Frederick William I introduced provision for invalids by placing them in subordinate positions in the civil administration. Already in the concept personally drafted by Frederick William I for the Instruction for the General Directorate of 20.12.1722 it was stipulated that “all gate clerks, land riders, house riders, mill riders ... shall be invalid non-commissioned officers and soldiers.” In the king’s view, invalid soldiers were especially suitable to fill subordinate posts in the administrative hierarchy. Thus, in the following period non-commissioned officers were provided, for example, as messengers, police riders, gate clerks or clerks.

Moreover, the king was keen to keep the invalids in the country; a corresponding patent, “that the discharged soldiers shall not go abroad, but shall be addressed to the commissariats, chambers and district councils or be accommodated in the countryside,” dates from 14.02.1714. In the reform of the invalid fund in 1713 Frederick William I determined: “As for the soldiers themselves who are to be admitted among the invalids and accommodated, the Directorate is not to meddle in that, but this is His Royal Majesty’s own affair, which the soldiers shall each time see to themselves and then further dispose of accordingly”⁶. According to Schnackenburg, in addition to the inspections of invalids at the usual reviews there were also special invalid musters, for example in the years 1725 to 1729. Under the successor of the Soldier King the system of invalid provision was to be further expanded.

Frederick the Great, like his father, expressly acknowledged the moral duty to provide for invalids: “A soldier who sacrifices his limbs, his health, his strength and his life for the common good has, when he is weakened by age and maimed in his limbs, a claim to the benefits of those for whom he risked everything”⁷. The king here argues with the motive of solidarity and gratitude and calls ingratitude “an ugly vice of the citizen,” which becomes “abominable” when a “sovereign or a republic lacks gratitude.” Nevertheless, Frederick the Great considered granting provision upon discharge and in cases of invalidity always as a reward for good and faithful service; actual or alleged failures of individuals or entire units had sanctions as a consequence: “There have been regiments in this last war that served so badly that, to punish them, their invalids do not partake of the benefits given to others, because punishments and rewards must correspond to the services”⁸. Sanctions of this kind affected in particular the East Prussian regiments and the officers and men of units affected by the surrender at Maxen (21.10.1759).

The Regulation of 1743⁹ stipulated regarding provision: “When among the regiments a fellow has become invalid due to age or sickness, His Royal Majesty absolutely does not want them to be discharged without His prior knowledge; rather the regiments shall report them to His Majesty so that they may be provided for and shall not need to go begging...” At the same time it was ordered that discharged soldiers should retain their coat, waistcoat and trousers, “so that the discharged soldier may not leave the regiment naked.” Grenadiers who were seasoned in war were subject to a special rule of the mentioned regulation: “When grenadiers who took part in both campaigns become invalid, they shall be sent to Berlin on the 20th of February each year so that His Royal Majesty may examine them and, if they are unfit for service, take care of their accommodation”¹⁰.

Facilities and measures for invalid provision in the Frederician era were indeed manifold: in Berlin the Invalidenhaus existed¹¹. The foundation stone was laid on 02.05.1747 and the handover took place on 15 November of the following year. Generalmajor Georg Franz Konrad Freiherr v. d. Golz (chief of K 10) was entrusted with preparations for its construction; he also authored the first instruction for the commander of the Invalidenhaus. This post was held until 1768 by Colonel Samuel von Feilitsch. On 31.08.1748 an order was issued to the regiments to “submit a list of those invalids from the recent Silesian wars who, wholly invalidated by wounds and so far provided for with two Thalers monthly, had behaved very well and had served especially faithfully on war occasions, so that they are worthy to be rewarded, and to send these men away in such a manner that they arrive here for admission to the Invalidenhaus newly established by Me on 15 November and shall report to the commander of said Invalidenhaus, Colonel v. Feylitsch, ... ”¹².

On 13.11.1748 the General Adjutant Johann Jobst Heinrich Wilhelm v. Buddenbrock received the instruction to “take the still-missing 19 non-commissioned officers and 93 rank-and-file from Werder” for the Invalidenhaus¹³. The personnel establishment of the Invalidenhaus in 1748 comprised 1 commander, 3 captains, 6 lieutenants, 3 ensigns, 600 non-commissioned officers and privates = 613 (1867: 507, 1913: 327). The annual victualling budget amounted in tracts to a total of 18,903 Reichsthaler, the annual maintenance expense 3,026 Reichsthaler, 22 groschen, and the costs for light and oil 902 Reichsthaler, 22 groschen. In addition to accommodation, clothing and victuals, each sergeant received 4 Thalers monthly, each staff sergeant 3 Thalers, 8 groschen, each corporal 3 Thalers and each private 2 Thalers.

The Invalidenhaus was attached to a number of estates because there was an effort to help this institution toward economic autonomy. Thus it had its own agriculture with a mill, fattening livestock, a nursery, brewery, distillery and even a silkworm breeding operation; in addition there were a bakery, a washhouse and a slaughterhouse.

There were, however, reservations among the invalids toward the Invalidenhaus, which were shared by other contemporaries. Even before this institution was established Faßmann commented on this problem: “To build and endow an Invaliden-House for impoverished, poor and pressed soldiers Your Majesty the King already as Crown Prince has taken the provision. Yet because a poor soldier is more helped when he receives a tolerable allowance with the freedom to spend the little where he wishes, perhaps with his own or other charitable people, whereas board in a common place, its servants, the upkeep of its buildings, and other circumstances are far more expensive and thereby all the more burdensome for the poor invalids, it would be better to sustain such persons with an addition, with their own, or where they otherwise desire; whereupon that which would have to be spent on buildings and servants could go to these infirm and needy people and be distributed to their benefit”¹⁴. In addition to the Berlin Invalidenhaus there was room in the country poorhouse in Kreuzburg in Silesia, whose financing the king participated in, for the accommodation of “some” invalid officers and rank-and-file¹⁵.

Besides the cadres of the four country regiments¹⁶ and the corps of discharged Guard invalids (called the “Brown Coats” in Werder, founded 1729/30)¹⁷, there existed from 1742 to 1763 the “New Garrison Regiment,” which comprised a total of 12 companies and was stationed in various garrison locations. It was composed exclusively of invalids and the discharged and is therefore to be classified as a pure invalid troop¹⁸. Invalid companies within individual regiments were not established until 1793.

Furthermore, attempts were made to place serviceable invalids in subordinate positions in the civil administration: they served as land riders, executors, chancery messengers, visitors, gate clerks, wood administrators, wagon and harness masters and from 1779 as village schoolteachers¹⁹, at the General Directorate, at the chambers and governments, at the postal administration, at the General Tobacco Administration and at the régie. The invalids of the Feldjäger corps were placed in the civilian forestry service from 1758. Frederick the Great further demanded that the lower officials of the Berlin magistrate be taken, as far as possible, from the circle of invalids”²⁰. The ecclesiastical department, however, especially opposed the use of invalid soldiers as teachers, so this provision variant met with little success. Yet not only in the placement of invalids as village schoolteachers were there problems; the king repeatedly encountered resistance in his attempts to place invalids in subordinate administrative positions. In 1746 the king criticized the war and domain chambers on this matter and in 1747 and 1758 reviewed the hiring of former soldiers in the administration.

In regard to Colonel Jakob Clapin v. Colong’s merits for the invalid system, Frederick the Great wrote the following on 19.10.1780:

“I have received your report of the 17th of this month with the invalid lists and from it see your complaints against the General Excise and Customs Administration that, despite your recommendations, it takes so little care for the accommodation of invalids. For this reason the most emphatic order has been sent to them that they are to accommodate the invalids before all others. For that purpose you are to prepare a nominal list of 1000 men and select from them those who are most capable and most useful, and submit this list. I will then send it to the excise régie with the order to accommodate these invalids one after another and to abolish all the wigmakers and other idlers they have so far preferred to the invalids ... ”²¹. Concerning the dismissal of a former sergeant from his post as salt factor in the salt department, the king wrote in 1781 to the responsible minister v. Werder: “You will not want to reject My invalids. You yourself were a soldier, I still am one, and I like to see my comrades provided for.” Already in 1776 the king had noted in the margin of a report on the dismissal of the steward of the orphanage in Züllichau, a former sergeant with 38 years’ service: “... but you chase away My invalids, that is also not right.”²². Despite these difficulties, over time many soldiers no longer fit for duty were placed in appropriate posts, for example in Infantry Regiment No. 16 (Königsberg/East Prussia) as sacristan, wedding and funeral messenger, bell ringer, church servant, beadle, messenger and schoolmaster. Between 1783 and 1786, however, only five invalids from the aforementioned regiment obtained civil appointments; the number of applicants was too large and the number of available and suitable posts too small²³_.

Therefore petitions had to be rejected again and again: “My dear G.M. v. Stille. From your letter of the 2nd I have seen that you wanted to recommend your old drummer to me for the mayoralty in Ermsleben. But I have many invalid non-commissioned officers whom I must first accommodate before I can think of this drummer”²⁴.

The allocation of colonists within the so-called Bildner establishment in the Oder, Netze and Warta marshes is also a part of invalid provision, as invalid and discharged soldiers were among them²⁵. These invalids appointed as “Bildner and military colonists” were to “populate the land” and it was intended to prevent them from “going abroad”²⁶. The general intention to keep foreign-born invalids in the country is made clear in an order of the king of 01.03.1786 to General v. Götzen: “Furthermore I reply to your inquiry in regard to the invalids among the foreigners that if there are invalids among the foreigners, such are by no means to be sent out of the country again, but are to be supported here in the country”²⁷. In Brandenburg-Prussia the allocation of retired soldiers as a measure of provision was already known in 1660. In addition, discharged soldiers were granted usufructs or were exempted from municipal craft restrictions²⁸. On 28.03.1733 the Royal War and Domain Chamber at Cleves published the rescript issued in Berlin on the 13th of that month, according to which invalid soldiers with at least 12 years of service were to be granted the citizenship and master rights in the towns free of charge²⁹. This too was intended to facilitate the reintegration of discharged soldiers into civilian life.

The majority of invalids, however, received the “Gnadenthaler.” By the order of 30 June 1746 invalids were divided into three classes: 1. those who cannot help themselves, 2. those to be “employed” (who can perform light duties), and 3. those who still have to live. The 1st class received 2, the 2nd and 3rd classes 1 Thaler³⁰. Which conditions unfit-for-service soldiers had to meet to receive financial grants in the form of a “Gnadenthaler” can be inferred from a number of individual records. On 03.07.1749 Frederick the Great replied to a petition from Major General v. Stosch as follows: “I have received your letter of the 25th of last month in which you requested a grace salary to be accorded to the eleven invalids named in the list you sent. Since these did not become invalid through wounds received before the enemy, they therefore cannot yet receive any invalid salary”³¹. In a royal letter of 04.05.1743 to the regimental chief of H 1, Johann v. Bronikowski (1690–1767), it was ordered to discharge the old hussars. “The two ninety-year-old hussars, Johann Bialaczekowsky and Alexander Ruzkowsky, as well as the hussar Krüger who became invalid in the war, shall each receive a monthly grace salary of 2 Reichsthaler from the Invaliden fund from 1 June this year”³². In another case there is a dragoon named Christoph Zimmermann from Regiment D V., who is said to have received 19 wounds in the battle of Czaslau and therefore, “since he can no longer maintain himself even by begging, asks for a grace salary of one Thaler monthly.” The king wanted to grant the request but first commissioned the General Adjutant v. Buddenbrock to verify the truth of the stated circumstances and to make inquiries³³. An indispensable prerequisite for monetary provision was therefore that the invalidity resulted from a wound in war; only then was there apparently justified hope of a grant from the limited fund for the awarding of appropriate “Gnadenthaler.”

On the types and possibilities of invalid provision Frederick the Great sums up in his Political Testament of 1768: “... For this reason I founded the Invalidenhaus near Berlin. It has the flaw that it can take only 600 men. That is not enough in relation to the size of the army. The war chest also has a fund from which one gives a taler per month to the wretched who have withdrawn to the countryside; and all non-commissioned officers and the old meritorious soldiers are provided with a small appointment at the excise, at customs, at the tobacco régie and everywhere there are openings they can fill. Independently of all these institutions there are still a number of poor soldiers to whom nothing could be given so far and for whom I intend to set up a small fund”³⁴.

At the annual reviews not only replacements, i.e. recruits, but also those leaving, among them the invalids, were presented to the king or to the General Inspector. Each year the king was also submitted with provision lists. At regimental level precise invalid lists were kept. These special list-based compilations and evaluations were entered into the regimental books and provided sufficient information material on the provision situation in the respective unit. Such invalid lists are verifiable, for example, for No. 8 (1783), No. 23 (1805), K 2 (1787) and K 3 (1805). They named the invalids still to be provided for and those invalids who could support themselves. The invalid list of K 2 (1787) already shows the then spectrum of provision possibilities for the needy: civil appointment, Gnadenthaler, placement in the Invalidenhaus, transfer to a country regiment or use for “small appointments.” In K 3 (1805) invalids are differentiated into those who “actually remain in rank and file, with the indication of the appointment to which they are listed” and those who “no longer stand in rank and file, yet are still unprovided for and those who were provided for in the years 1804 and 1805.”

The evaluation of all these invalid lists at the central level enabled an overview of the number of provided and unprovided soldiers in the army. Based on such surveys, it was determined in February 1762 that a total of 8,926 invalids received state provision: 600 in the Invalidenhaus, 343 on the island of Werder in the corps of the “Brown Coats” and 7,983 as recipients of the “Gnadenthaler.” However, these provided invalids were contrasted by a steadily growing number of needy soldiers who were no longer fit for service due to age or because of illness or wounds. Above all, the abrupt increase in invalids as a consequence of the three Silesian Wars posed an almost insoluble task for Frederick II, since it far exceeded the financial possibilities of the Prussian state, which after 1763 was in any case heavily burdened by economic reconstruction. In 1779 there were 4,624 unprovided invalids, in 1785 there were 5,893 and in August 1786 the number of unprovided invalids had to be given as 6,382³⁵. Thus the number of unprovided invalids steadily grew, which certainly represented a personal hardship for many affected.

The examination of preserved lists of invalids additionally allows statements to be made about how the supply situation in a single unit was constituted at a specific point in time. For example, four nominal lists in the regimental book of the Infantry Regiment von Hacke (No. 8, Stettin) from the year 1783 are devoted to the group of invalids. According to these documents, in 1783 this regiment still had 23 unsupported invalids from the years 1778 to 1782, so to speak in a waiting position. The 23 invalids named are, with an average age of 54 years, primarily unfit for service for health reasons, i.e. unfit for service due to illness or age, or only fit for limited service. The unsupported invalids are divided into 13 foreigners and 10 natives, 17 of whom are married and have children. Already a financial burden for the regiment, the social situation is aggravated by these family members (wives and children). Five invalids petition for the 'Gnadenthaler', one for accommodation in the Invalidenhaus opened in Berlin in 1748, and three for transfer to one of the four Landregiments (probably the Stettin Land Regiment would be relevant). It is interesting that only one invalid desires accommodation in the Invalidenhaus; personal freedom was presumably preferred to the secure accommodation and care in the orderly framework of the Invalidenhaus (see above).

Thirteen invalids are still suitable for assignment to a civilian occupation, for example as excise inspectors or as gate clerks. The oldest unsupported invalid is 65, the youngest 28, with lengths of service ranging from 43 to 3 years.

Between 1782 and 1783 eight invalids could be provided for, two of whom are considered self-supporting. These eight accommodated invalids are contrasted by 14 new arrivals in 1783 (average age: 51 years, average length of service: 22 years). The oldest invalid in this group is even 77 years old (service time: 39 years), a true veteran who probably experienced the Second Silesian War, the Seven Years' War and the 'Potato War' (1778–79). The majority of the newly presented invalids, namely 11 of 14, are married. Five have children to support. Five wish to be further employed in civilian service and four to be transferred to a Landregiment. Two are deemed by the regiment suitable for 'small duties' (e.g. as night guards) and three claim the 'Gnadenthaler'. Ten of the invalids are with the regiment in Stettin.

The successors of Frederick the Great attempted by further measures to alleviate 'the distress of discharged warriors'; in particular, the reform efforts under Frederick William II represented real progress. Article 4 of the Royal Prussian recruitment manifesto of 01.02.1787 now assured the foreigner that, if he 'should become invalid in Our wartime services within the years of his capitulation, and thereby unfit and unusable for the same', he need not fear being cast off and left without bread. Rather, it was promised to provide for him 'according to his abilities in some other way, and to give him maintenance until the end of his life'. Thus the guarantee of lifelong provision in the event of invalidity was pronounced.

A commission appointed under the chairmanship of General von Möllendorff dealt from the end of 1787 with the 'regulation of the invalid provision system'. Based on its proposals, principles to be observed in the provision were adopted on 06.07.1788. Accordingly, in providing for invalid soldiers one had to differentiate between foreigners and natives and, in addition to the causes of invalidity, also take into account the length of service. A claim to support was established for both foreigners and natives in the case of incapacity for service if it resulted from a severe wound suffered in war or from an accident for which they were not at fault. The same entitlement position was acquired by a soldier who, in peacetime while in actual service, was harmed by an unfortunate accident and thereby became unfit for service. However, this was regarded as an exceptional case, for in principle a right to state provision in case of invalidity should follow from an uninterrupted length of service of a certain duration. The foreigner could, after the expiry of the second capitulation and actual invalidity, hope for provision as a reward; a proper entitlement, irrespective of his physical condition, only arose after the third served capitulation. The prerequisite for this, however, was a period of service in uninterrupted succession and no desertion offence. The native, who served due to general conscription (with exemptions), entered these rights after 30 years of service. If a native sought discharge before the expiry of such a period — twenty years of service was the rule — he had to prove how he 'was able to support himself, without becoming a burden on the public invalid provision institutions, and without obtaining anything more than the free civic and master rights'.

From 1788 provincial invalid companies were established, namely 1 Neumark, 1 Kurmark, 1 Magdeburg, 1 Vorpommern, 1 Hinterpommern, 1 East-, 2 West- and 3 South Prussian, as well as 5 Silesian³⁶, 1 Franconian (1797) and 1 Hanoverian (1802)37). They served to accommodate invalids who could still perform limited service (occupation, mostly guard duty). The rank-and-file of these formations received 2 thalers monthly. A prerequisite for admission was a minimum length of service (infantry: 20, cavalry: 24 years). The Invalidenhaus in Berlin continued to exist. It admitted only non-commissioned officers and rank-and-file from the entire army who were 'crippled and mutilated in their limbs'. Furthermore, other houses for the provision of invalids were established, such as in Rybnik, Straußberg, later in Brandenburg, Wittstock, Tangermünde, Prenzlau/Templin and in Tapiau (East Prussia). Since all these institutions were obviously insufficient given the large number of still unsupported invalids, in 1792 the establishment of invalid companies at the individual infantry regiments began. These had an allotment of 2 officers, 4 non-commissioned officers, 1 drummer and 40–45 rank-and-file each. The larger or provincial invalid companies mentioned above remained in existence, but were now only intended for soldiers of the cavalry, artillery, fusilier battalions, etc., who were unfit for service38l. These invalid units were divided into corporalships, which were assigned to the individual regiments or battalions. Only those invalids were to be admitted who, in addition to a sufficiently long length of service, were not suitable for placement in a civilian post and also could not 'have supported themselves well as free guards'. For the invalids of the First Battalion of the Royal Life Guard, the Regiment Garde and the Regiment of the Gardes du Corps, the corps of the discharged existed in Potsdam, and for the invalids of the Grenadier Guard Battalion the Werder invalid company still existed. In 1803 a special company of invalids was formed in Berlin to operate the new street lamps.

Similar to the Royal Prussian recruitment manifesto (1787) for foreigners, the canton regulation of 1792 for natives also proclaimed the guarantee of provision in the event of invalidity by stipulating that every invalid 'shall be provided either through civil positions, or through accommodation in an invalid provision institution, employment in an invalid company or the Gnadenthaler'. There remained an administrative reluctance toward military applicants for civil service. A circular of 29.03.1792 standardized 'precautionary measures in the provision of invalids' with posts in the civil administration, since it had apparently happened more frequently that invalids thus placed left their new functions after some time out of dissatisfaction and then sought a new position. Henceforth, the candidates were to be better informed in advance about their new duties; no proposal for provision was to be submitted without a protocol of this instruction signed by the invalid.

The volume of the invalids' fund could be increased considerably over time. Its revenues in 1799/1800 amounted to a total of 541925 thalers, this sum being composed as follows: from other funds 400796, interest from capital 33506, from irregular revenues (e.g. fines, deserter and dispensary fees) 32535, cantonist funds 9960 and other income (e.g. lottery proceeds) 4723 thalers. These revenues were offset by total expenditures of 507127 thalers, including 237629 thalers for pensions and waiting pay for 736 officers and 100676 thalers for grace pay for non-commissioned officers and rank-and-file (exclusive to Silesia).

The reforms described above meant a considerable improvement for the provision of invalids, yet they were not sufficient to solve the problem. There were still many unsupported unfit soldiers who in part still remained with the regiments and were even still listed there as serving. A government order (Berlin) of 14.10.1803 speaks against this: 'As it has been noticed in the regiment of Kunheim that captains leave very many old men, who have been discharged as invalids for several years, nevertheless in ranks and on parades, His Royal Majesty commands that these men are to be brought to the invalid companies and instead young men are to be employed from the company reserves ...'. Similar incidents are known from other units as well. While for von der Golz such a practice is conditioned by the lack of provision possibilities and thus represents a humanitarian measure, Büsch regards the postponement of the discharge of invalid soldiers as embezzlement and explains these cases by the greed of the respective company commanders³⁹.

Contemporary judgments of the welfare measures for invalid soldiers and their dependants are, due to the unsatisfactory outcome, generally negative, but mostly refer to the period before 1786: 'The provision of old soldiers was the weakest side of Frederick the Second's army, and the institutions at that time in this regard were, perhaps to save costs, so inadequate that they deserve no mention. Yes, often the discharge of invalids bordered on cruelty when they were not suited for any civil provision, and after the great war it was not uncommon to see maimed warriors begging ...'⁴⁰.

In addition to Lossow, Berenhorst also commented on this topic: 'A native soldier who is young but nevertheless unfit for further service is permitted to seek his bread; the foreigner, in the same case, is taken across the border.'⁴¹.

The former Prussian lieutenant general and later general of infantry in Danish service, Friedrich August von Finck, demands in his 'Thoughts on Military Matters': 'One or more well-arranged invalid houses in proportion to the strength of an army that a sovereign deems it good to maintain are an indispensable thing. But no one is received into these invalid houses except those who are absolutely no longer able to earn their bread; and those foreigners who know of no place in the country to which they can go. The remaining invalids, who are countrymen, must be sent home with a monthly Gnadenthaler; thus they do not become too great a burden on the state, and can nonetheless render services to it through their labor, as this arrangement has been very wisely introduced in the Prussian states.' At the same time Finck points out: 'What can encourage a soldier more to his duty than when he is certain that he has a good provision for life, whether he is rendered unable to serve by age or by wounds? It is therefore a main concern of a sovereign to provide his incapacitated officers and rank-and-file with a good provision, so that such old and deserving people, who have so often risked their lives and bodies, property and blood for the fatherland, are not obliged to beg for their bread. It is incredible what an impression both things make on people.'⁴².

Among the critics of the invalid provision in the Old Prussian army was also Baron vom und zum Stein. As chamber director of the Minden Chamber Department, Stein advocated better provision for invalids. Alone in the aforementioned department the number of unsupported invalids amounted to 1,855 towards the end of the 18th century. Of these, 646 were in urgent need of support. Stein criticized that, on the one hand, the duty of service primarily rested on the shoulders of the lower social strata, while on the other hand discharged soldiers often had to suffer want and hunger. The groups privileged by canton freedom should therefore at least contribute to the provision of the invalids. The Minden Chamber considered a monthly cash allowance of 1½ thalers to be the minimum provision. The proposals of the later reformer did not, however, find the full approval of the central authorities, so that in a memorandum of 16.II.1803 he drew a resigned balance: 'Garrison status, canton, invalid system, military buildings have remained in their previous and largely imperfect condition.'⁴³.

In retrospect, despite these thought-provoking remarks by contemporaries, it can be stated that there was an awareness that invalid soldiers had to be supported. A corresponding welfare state was only developed in rudiments, but there was already a legally fixed claim of the soldier to state care in the event of incapacity for service. The material limits of the Old Prussian state did not allow the problem of provision for invalids to be solved satisfactorily. At best, nothing more than subsistence security was offered; self-help was generally expected. Additionally, group egotisms made a sufficient solution to this social question more difficult, e.g. in the placement of military applicants in the administration. It cannot be denied that the provision remained at a low level and that the distress of a larger number of unsupported invalid soldiers was not resolved. Nevertheless, the measures, especially after 1786, represented a positive development. At least part of the soldier's fear of an uncertain economic future in the event of invalidity was taken away.

In addition to the works cited in the notes, the following titles were mainly consulted: Anmerkungen eines Patriotischgesinnten über die Versorgung der in Kriegesdiensten grau und zu fernem Miltairdiensten unbrauchbar gewordenen Menschen, Berlin 1787.

Hans Bleckwenn, Das Königlich Preussische Invalidenhaus Berlin, in: Les Invalides. Trois Siecles aHistoire, Paris 1974, p. 383 f.

Cavan, Krieges- oder Militär-Recht, wie solches jetzt bei der Königlich-Preußischen Armee besteht, 1801, reprint Bad Honnef 1982.

Hansen, Ernst Willi, Reports and Criticism on the Problems of a Social History of the German Military in the 17th and 18th Centuries, in: Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung, vol. 6, issue 4, 1979, p. 425 ff.

Ollech, v., Geschichte des Berliner Invlidenhauses von 1748 bis 1884, supplement to the Militär-Wochenblatt, 1885.

Sonst und Jetzt im Königlichen Invalidenhaus Berlin 1748-1913, Berlin 1913.