Skip to content
Vestes Bellica Military history archive

Vestes Bellica

Vestes Bellica

Search Vestes Bellica

Find articles from the collection and the blog.

Archive for this collection

Explore articles

95 contributions in the archive

95 articles found

Heeressoziologie

The Prussian Army under Frederick William I (1713 - 40) - Chapter 6 - The Technical Troops

Artillery was, alongside infantry and cavalry, the youngest of the three arms, although its origins in Prussia go back to the 14th century. The handling of the firearms and cannons was initially performed by masters who gradually formed their own guild. Only under the Great Elector (1640–88) was the artillery subordinated to officers and thus turned into a regular military formation. On 1 Jan. 1672 the Great Elector issued an “Articuls-Brieff vor die Artillerie-Bediente in denen Chur-Fürstlichen Brandenburgischen Vestungen” [1], which, in addition to the oath formula for the gunsmith, contained detailed requirements and rules of conduct for the artillery personnel. In 1683 one bombadier and four gunner companies were established, and thus the artillery actually first emerged as an independent arm. King Frederick I also promoted the artillery and on 20 Dec. 1697 appointed Margrave Philip of Brandenburg‑Schwedt (1669–1711) as Generalfeldzeugmeister and Chief of the Artillery. He strove for its organization and training. Under his aegis the artillery received service regulations. These were confirmed by the King on 15 Mar. 1704 and in 12 articles regulated the internal affairs of the arm [2].

Organisation

The Prussian Army under Frederick William I (1713–40) - Chapter 1 - The Prussian State in the Year 1713

In the midday hour of February 25, 1713, Frederick I, King in Prussia since 1701, died in the Berlin Palace. Already on February 24, 1713, the dying king had summoned the heir to the throne, his son Frederick William, together with his wife and Prince Frederick, who had been born on January 24, 1712, to bless them. With Frederick I died a monarch whose figure easily recedes into the background between the three dominant personalities of Brandenburg-Prussian history — the Great Elector, the Soldier King and Frederick the Great. Married to the intellectually significant Sophie Charlotte (1668–1705), he was not only devoted to the fine arts, but during his reign pursued the elevation to kingship with skill and great energy. Because the Habsburg emperor was in urgent need of Brandenburg's military assistance in the looming struggle with France, he finally yielded to the persistent pressure. Frederick I's self-coronation took place on January 18, 1701, in Königsberg. The royal dignity was based on East Prussia, which stood outside the imperial association, and with it the scattered possessions of the House of Hohenzollern began the slow coalescence into a state unit; henceforth the dispersed holdings, differing in tradition, economic structure and interests, had an overarching — ideal — point of reference. This increased the influence of the central government in Berlin. The royal crown was symbolic in that it also embodied, in domestic politics, the absolutist claim to rule. The advancement in rank was also necessary so as not to lose political weight within the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. As early as 1697, Elector Frederick Augustus I of Saxony (1694–1733) had become King of Poland. From the familial relations of Elector George of Hanover (1698–1727) — his mother Sophia was the great-granddaughter of King James I (i.e. James VI) — there also arose the Wettin claim to the English crown. After the last monarch of the House of Stuart died without issue, this claim was realized in 1714. Prussia could not be left behind in this respect. By the coronation it also assumed, in succession to Electoral Saxony, the role of Protestant protector in northern Germany, since the Saxon elector had earlier converted to the Catholic faith in view of the Polish crown. In the still strongly religiously shaped 18th century this was a factor not to be underestimated, which continued to have an impact during the Seven Years' War. In that respect, the royal dignity was more than mere satisfaction of personal vanity.

Organisation

The Prussian Army under Frederick William I (1713 - 40) - Preface and Table of Contents

Law No. 46 in the Gazette of the Control Council in Germany of 31.03.1947 decreed the dissolution of the state of Prussia. Thus Prussia officially came to an end; however, it is disputed whether the Prussian state had not already been lost within the German Reich and whether the victors' dictate after the Second World War therefore served only as political window dressing. The clarification of the question whether it was in 1871 or 1947 that the short and eventful Prussian history, full of light and shadow, came to an end is ultimately idle; the historical fact is that Prussia no longer exists today. In this respect the Prussian state, which entered European history relatively late, shares the fate of many extinct polities; notable, however, is that — although the Prussian state no longer exists and thus belongs to the past — it still excites passions today and remains a controversial object of interest. The turn to this chapter of German history was reinforced and updated by the major Prussia exhibition in 1981 and by the 200th anniversary of Frederick the Great's death. Even in the former GDR the Prussian tradition was rediscovered and politically instrumentalized before reunification. The attention with which Prussia is still regarded is evident in many forms. Alongside the opening of various — in particular locally oriented — museums, an unabated flood of printed works on this subject continues to inundate the book market. It is striking that, both in the civilian and in the military sphere, the father, Frederick William I, always stands in the shadow of his brilliant son. While the number of biographies about Frederick the Great has become almost unmanageable, for a long time there was a lack of a comprehensive — scholarly — life description of Frederick William I from the viewpoint of more recent historiography 1).