Chapter X: Part 10

The same determined spirit which characterized German naval policy was evident also in her relations with the other powers. The suspicions as to the stability of the Triple Alliance produced, indeed, for some years a kind of nervousness in the attitude of the government, whose determination to assert for Germany a leading international role tended to isolate her in Europe. This nervousness was, in 1903 and 1904, especially evident in the efforts to weaken the Franco-Russian alliance by the policy of what Bebel denounced as Germany "crawling on her stomach before Russia." Germany not only backed up Russian policy in the East, and at the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War took up towards her an attitude of more than benevolent neutrality, but the cabinets of Berlin and St Petersburg entered into an agreement under which political offenders against either government were to be treated as traitors to both. This arrangement, which made the Prussian police the active allies of the Third Section in the persecution of political suspects, created vast indignation among all shades of Liberal opinion in Germany, an indignation which culminated with the famous Konigsberg trial. This was a prosecution of nine German subjects for sedition, conspiracy and _lese-majeste_ against the Russian emperor, and for the circulation of books and pamphlets attacking him and his government. The defendants were poor smugglers from the Esthonian border marshes, who in the course of their ordinary avocations had carried bales of revolutionary tracts into Russia without troubling as to their contents. The trial, which took place in July 1904, excited widespread attention. The prosecution was conducted with all the force of the government; the defence was undertaken by some of the most brilliant Liberal advocates of Germany and developed in effect into an elaborate indictment, supported by a great weight of first-hand evidence, of the iniquities of the Russian regime. The verdict of the court was a serious rebuff for the government; after a preliminary investigation of nine months, and a public trial of a fortnight, the major charges against the prisoners were dismissed, and six of them were condemned only to short terms of imprisonment for conspiracy.

The progress of the Russo-Japanese War, however, soon relieved Germany of all anxiety as to the safety of her eastern frontiers, and produced a corresponding change in her attitude. The Russian disasters in Manchuria at the beginning of 1905 were followed by an extraordinary demonstration of the emperor William's ideas as to "the world-wide dominion of the Hohenzollerns," in a sort of imperial progress in the East, made for the purpose of impressing the Mahommedan world with the power of Germany. In 1904 the German attitude towards Great Britain had been in the highest degree conciliatory; the Anglo-French agreement as to Egypt was agreed to at Berlin; a visit of King Edward VII. to Kiel was reciprocated by that of the German squadron to Plymouth; in July a treaty of arbitration was signed between the two countries, while in the Reichstag the chancellor declared that, Germany's interests in Morocco being purely commercial, the understanding between France and England as to that country, embodied in the convention of the 8th of April 1904, did not immediately concern her. This attitude was now changed. On the 31st of March 1905 the emperor William landed at Tangier, and is reported on this occasion to have used language which in effect amounted to a promise to support the sultan of Morocco in resisting French control. His visit to the Holy Land and the solemn pilgrimage to Jerusalem were, in the same way, a striking _coup de theatre_ designed to strengthen the influence won by Germany in the councils of the Ottoman empire, an influence which she had been careful not to weaken by taking too active a part in the concert of the powers engaged in pressing on the question of Macedonian reform.

Meanwhile pressure was being put upon France to admit the German claim to a voice in the affairs of North Africa, a claim fortified by the mission of Count von Tattenbach, German minister at Lisbon, to Fez for the purpose of securing from the sherifian government special privileges for Germany. This aggressive policy was firmly resisted by M. Delcasse, the French minister of foreign affairs, and for a while war seemed to be inevitable. At Berlin powerful influences, notably that of Herr von Holstein--that mysterious omnipotence behind the throne--were working for this end; the crippling of Russia seemed too favourable an opportunity to be neglected for crushing the menace of French armaments. That an actual threat of war was conveyed to the French government (through the German ambassador at Rome, it is said) there can be no doubt. That war was prevented was due partly to the timidity of French ministers, partly to the fact that at the last moment Herr von Holstein shrank from the responsibility of pressing his arguments to a practical conclusion. The price of peace, however, was the resignation of M. Delcasse, who had been prepared to maintain a bold front. Germany had perhaps missed an opportunity for putting an end for ever to the rivalry of France; but she had inflicted a humiliation on her rival, and proved her capacity to make her voice heard in the councils of Europe.[8] The proceedings of the conference of Algeciras (see MOROCCO) emphasized the restored confidence of Germany in her international position. It was notably the part played by Austria in supporting the German point of view throughout at the conference that strengthened the position of Germany in Europe, by drawing closer the bonds of sympathy between the two empires. How strong this position had become was demonstrated during the crisis that arose after the revolution in Turkey and the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria in October 1908. The complete triumph of Baron von Aehrenthal's policy, in the face of the opposition of most of the European powers, was due to German support, and Germany suddenly appeared as the arbiter of the affairs of the European continent (see EUROPE: _History_). German nervousness, which had seen British intrigues everywhere, and suspected in the beneficent activities of King Edward VII. a Machiavellian plan for isolating Germany and surrounding her with a net of hostile forces, gave way to a spirit of confidence which could afford to laugh at the terror of Germany which, to judge from the sensational reports of certain popular British journals, had seized upon Great Britain.

Internal difficulties.

The great position gained by the German empire in these years was won in the face of great and increasing internal difficulties. These difficulties were, in the main, the outcome of the peculiar constitution of the empire, of the singular compromise which it represented between the traditional medieval polity and the organization of a modern state, and of the conflicts of ideals and of interests to which this gave rise; these being complicated by the masterful personality of the emperor William, and his tendency to confuse his position as German emperor by the will of the princes with his position as king of Prussia by the grace of God.

In general, Germany had passed since the war through a social and economic revolution similar to that undergone by Great Britain during the earlier half of the 19th century, though on a greater scale and at a much accelerated pace. A country mainly agricultural, and in parts purely feudal, was changed into one of vast industries and of great concentrations of population; and for the ferment created by this change there was no such safety-valve in the representative system as had existed in England since the Reform Bill. In spite of the election of the Reichstag by manhood suffrage, there existed, as Count Bulow pointed out in 1904, no real parliamentary system in Germany, and "owing to the economic, political, social and religious structure of the nation" there could never be one. Of the numerous groups composing the German parliament no one ever secured a majority, and in the absence of such a majority the imperial government, practically independent of parliament, knew how to secure its assent to its measures by a process of bargaining with each group in turn. This system had curious and very far-reaching results. The only group which stood outside it, in avowed hostility to the whole principle on which the constitution was based, was that of the Social Democrats, "the only great party in Germany which," so the veteran Mommsen declared in 1901, "has any claim to political respect." The consequence was the rapid extension and widening of the chasm that divided the German people. The mass of the working-class population in the Protestant parts of Germany belonged to the Social Democracy, an inclusive term covering variations of opinion from the doctrinaire system of Marx to a degree of Radicalism which in England would not be considered a bar to a peerage. To make head against this, openly denounced by the emperor himself as a treasonable movement, the government was from time to time forced to make concessions to the various groups which placed their sectional interests in the forefront of their programmes. To conciliate the Catholic Centre party, numerically the strongest of all, various concessions were from time to time made to the Roman Catholic Church, e.g. the repeal in 1904 of the clause of the Anti-Jesuit Law forbidding the settlement of individual members of the order in Germany. The Conservative Agrarians were conciliated by a series of tariff acts placing heavy duties on the importation of agricultural produce and exempting from duty agricultural implements.

Social Democracy.

The first of these tariffs, which in order to overcome Socialist obstruction was passed _en bloc_ on December 13-14, 1902, led to an alarming alteration in the balance of parties in the new Reichstag of 1903, the Socialists--who had previously numbered 58--winning 81 seats, a gain of 23. Of the other groups only one, and that hostile to the government--the Poles--had gained a seat. This startling victory of the Social Democracy, though to a certain extent discounted by the dissensions between the two wings of the party which were revealed at the congress at Dresden in the same year, was in the highest degree disconcerting to the government; but in the actual manipulation of the Reichstag it facilitated the work of the chancellor by enabling him to unite the other groups more readily against the common enemy. The most striking effect of the development of this antagonism was the gradual disappearance as a factor in politics of the Liberals, the chief builders of the Empire. Their part henceforth was to vote blindly with the Conservative groups, in a common fear of the Social Democracy, or to indulge in protests, futile because backed by no power inside or outside the parliament; their impotence was equally revealed when in December 1902 they voted with the Agrarians for the tariff, and in May 1909 when they withdrew in dudgeon from the new tariff committee, and allowed the reactionary elements a free hand. The political struggle of the future lay between the Conservative and Clerical elements in the state, alike powerful forces, and the organized power of the Social Democracy. In the elections of 1907, indeed, the Social Democratic party, owing to the unparalleled exertion of the government, had a set-back, its representation in parliament sinking to 43; but at the International Socialist Congress, which met at Stuttgart on the 18th of August, Herr Bebel was able to point out that, in spite of its defeat at the polls, the Socialist cause had actually gained strength in the country, their total poll having increased from 3,010,771 in 1903 to 3,250,000.

Prussia and the Empire.

In addition to the political strife and anxiety due to this fundamental cleavage within the nation, Germany was troubled during the first decade of the 20th century by friction and jealousies arising out of the federal constitution of the Empire and the preponderant place in it of Prussia. In the work of pressing on the national and international expansion of Germany the interests and views of the lesser constituent states of the Empire were apt to be overlooked or overridden; and in the southern states there was considerable resentment at the unitarian tendency of the north, which seemed to aim at imposing the Prussian model on the whole nation. This resentment was especially conspicuous in Bavaria, which clings more tenaciously than the other states to its separate traditions. When, on the 1st of April 1902, a new stamp, with the superscription "Deutsches Reich," was issued for the Empire, including Wurttemberg, Bavaria refused to accept it, retaining the stamp with the Bavarian lion, thus emphasizing her determination to retain her separate postal establishment. On the 23rd of October 1903 Baron Podevils, the new premier, addressing the Bavarian diet, declared that his government "would combat with all its strength" any tendency to assure the future of the Empire on any lines other than the federative basis laid down in the imperial constitution.

Personal intervention of the emperor.

This protest was the direct outcome of an instance of the tendency of the emperor to interfere in the affairs of the various governments of the Empire. In 1902 the Clerical majority in the Bavarian diet had refused to vote L20,000 asked by the government for art purposes, whereupon the emperor had telegraphed expressing his indignation and offering to give the money himself, an offer that was politely declined. Another instance of the emperor's interference, constitutionally of more importance as directly affecting the rights of the German sovereigns, was in the question of the succession to the principality of Lippe (see LIPPE). The impulsive character of the emperor, which led him, with the best intentions and often with excellent effect, to interfere everywhere and in everything and to utter opinions often highly inconvenient to his ministers, was the subject of an interpellation in the Reichstag on the 20th of January 1903 by the Socialist Herr von Vollmar, himself a Bavarian. Count Bulow, in answer to his criticisms, declared that "the German people desired, not a shadow, but an emperor of flesh and blood." None the less, the continued "indiscretions" of the emperor so incensed public opinion that, five years later, the chancellor himself was forced to side with it in obtaining from the emperor an undertaking to submit all his public utterances previously to his ministers for approval (see WILLIAM II., German emperor).

The non-German nationalities.

Meanwhile, the attempt to complete the Germanization of the frontier provinces of the Empire by conciliation or repression continued. In this respect progress was made especially in Alsace-Lorraine. In May 1902, in return for the money granted by the _Reichslander_ for the restoration of the imperial castle of Hohekonigsburg in the Vosges, the emperor promised to abolish the _Diktaturparagraphen_; the proposal was accepted by the Reichstag, and the exceptional laws relating to Alsace-Lorraine were repealed. Less happy were the efforts of the Prussian government at the Germanization of Prussian Poland and Schleswig. In the former, in spite of, or perhaps because of, the attempt to crush the Polish language and spirit, the Polish element continuously increased, reinforced by immigrants from across the frontier; in the latter the Danish language more than held its own, for similar reasons, but the treaty signed on the 11th of January 1907 between Prussia and Denmark, as to the status of the Danish "optants" in the duchies, removed the worst grievance from which the province was suffering (see SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION).

Resignation of Prince von Bulow.

Of more serious import were the yearly and increasing deficits in the imperial budget, and the consequent enormous growth of the debt. This was partly due to the commercial and industrial depression of the early years of the century, partly was another outcome of the federal constitution, which made it difficult to adjust the budget to the growing needs of the Empire without disarranging the finances of its constitutent states. The crisis became acute when the estimates for the year 1909 showed that some L25,000,000 would have to be raised by additional taxes, largely to meet the cost of the expanded naval programme. The budget presented to the Reichstag by Prince Bulow, which laid new burdens upon the landed and capitalist classes, was fiercely opposed by the Agrarians, and led to the break-up of the Liberal-Conservative _bloc_ on whose support the chancellor had relied since the elections of 1906. The budget was torn to pieces in the committee selected to report on it; the Liberal members, after a vain protest, seceded; and the Conservative majority had a free hand to amend it in accordance with their views. In the long and acrimonious debates that followed in the Reichstag itself the strange spectacle was presented of the chancellor fighting a coalition of the Conservatives and the Catholic Centre with the aid of the Socialists and Liberals. The contest was from the first hopeless, and, but for the personal request of the emperor that he would pilot the Finance Bill through the House in some shape or other, Prince Bulow would have resigned early in the year. So soon as the budget was passed he once more tendered his resignation, and on the 14th of July a special edition of the _Imperial Gazette_ announced that it had been accepted by the emperor. The post of imperial chancellor was at the same time conferred on Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, the imperial secretary of state for the interior.[9] (W. A. P.)

_Bibliography of German History._--Although the authorities for the history of Germany may be said to begin with Caesar, it is Tacitus who is especially useful, his _Germania_ being an invaluable mine of information about the early inhabitants of the country. In the dark and disordered centuries which followed there are only a few scanty notices of the Germans, mainly in the works of foreign writers like Gregory of Tours and Jordanes; and then the 8th and 9th centuries, the time of the revival of learning which is associated with the name of Charlemagne, is reached. By the end of this period Christianity had been firmly established among most of the German tribes; the monks were the trustees of the new learning, and we must look mainly, although not exclusively, to the monasteries for our authorities. The work of the monks generally took the form of _Annales_ or _Chronica_, and among the numerous German monasteries which are famous in this connexion may be mentioned Fulda, Reichenau, St Gall and Lorsch. For contemporary history and also for the century or so which preceded the lifetimes of their authors these writings are fairly trustworthy, but beyond this they are little more than collections of legends. There are also a large number of lives of saints and churchmen, in which the legendary element is still more conspicuous.

With regard to the _Annales_ and _Chronica_ three important considerations must be mentioned. They are local, they are monastic, and they are partisan. The writer in the Saxon abbey of Corvey, or in the Franconian abbey of Fulda, knows only about events which happened near his own doors; he records, it is true, occurrences which rumour has brought to his ears, but in general he is trustworthy only for the history of his own neighbourhood. The Saxon and the Franconian annalists know nothing of the distant Bavarians; there is even a gulf between the Bavarian and the Swabian. Then the Annals are monastic. To their writers the affairs of the great world are of less importance than those of the monastery itself. The Saxon Widukind, for instance, gives more space to the tale of the martyrdom of St Vitus than he does to several of the important campaigns of Henry the Fowler. Lastly, the annalist is a partisan. One is concerned to glorify at all costs the Carolingian house; another sacrifices almost everything to attack the emperor Henry IV. and to defend the Papacy; while a third holds a brief for some king or emperor, like Louis the Pious or Otto the Great.

Two difficulties are met with in giving an account of the sources of German history. In the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries it is hard, if not impossible, to disentangle the history of Germany from that of the rest of the Frankish empire of which it formed part; in fact it is not until the time of the dissensions between the sons of the emperor Louis I. that there are any signs of demarcation between the East and the West Franks, or, in other words, any separate history of Germany. The second difficulty arises later and is due to the connexion of Germany with the Empire. Germany was always the great pillar of the imperial power; for several centuries it was the Empire in everything but in name, and yet its political history is often overshadowed by the glamour of events in Italy. While the chroniclers were recording the deeds of Frederick I. and of Frederick II. in the peninsula, the domestic history of Germany remained to a large extent unwritten.

Among the early German chroniclers the Saxon Widukind, the author of the _Res gestae Saxonicae_, is worthy of mention. He was a monk of Corvey, and his work is the best authority for the early history of Saxony. Lambert, a monk of Hersfeld, and Widukind's countryman, Bruno, in his _De bello Saxonico_, tell the story of the great contest between the emperor Henry IV. and Pope Gregory VII., with special reference to the Saxon part of the struggle. But perhaps the ablest and the most serviceable of these early writers is Otto of Freising, a member of the Babenberg family. Otto was also related to the great house of Hohenstaufen, a relationship which gave him access to sources of information usually withheld from the ordinary monastic annalist, and his work is very valuable for the earlier part of the career of Frederick I. Something is learned, too, from biographies written by the monks, of which Einhard's _Vita Karoli Magni_ is the greatest and the best, and Wipo's life of the emperor Conrad II. is valuable, while another Carolingian courtier, Nithard, has a special interest as, almost alone among these early chroniclers, being a soldier and not a monk.

The monastic writers remain our chief authorities until the great change brought about by the invention of printing, although a certain amount of work was done by clerical writers attached to the courts of various rulers. Parallel with this event the revival of learning was producing a great number of men who could write, and, more important still, of men who were throwing off the monastic habits of thought and passing into a new intellectual atmosphere. The Renaissance was followed by the fierce controversies aroused by the Reformation, and the result was the output of an enormous mass of writings covering every phase of the mighty combat and possessing every literary virtue save that of impartiality. But apart from these polemical writings, many of which had only an ephemeral value, the Renaissance was the source of another stream of historical literature. Several princes and other leading personages, foremost among whom was the emperor Maximilian I., had spent a good deal of time and money in collecting the manuscripts of the medieval chroniclers, and these now began to be printed. The chronicle of Otto of Freising, which appeared in 1515, and the _Vita_ of Einhard, which appeared six years later, are only two among the many printed at this time. The publication of collections of chronicles began in 1529, and the uncritical fashion in which these were reproduced made forgeries easy and frequent. There was, indeed, more than a zeal for pure learning behind this new movement; for both parties in the great religious controversy of the time used these records of the past as a storehouse of weapons of offence. The Protestants eagerly sought out the writings which exposed and denounced the arrogance of the popes, while the Romanists attempted to counter them with the numerous lives of the saints.

But before the raw material of history thus began to increase enormously in bulk, it had already begun to change its character and to assume its modern form. The _Chronicle_ still survived as a medium of conveying information, though more often than not this was now written by a layman; but new stores of information were coming into existence, or rather the old stores were expanding and taking a different form. Very roughly these may be divided into six sections. (1) Official documents issued by the emperors and other German rulers. (2) Treaties concluded between Germany and other powers and also between one German state and another. (3) Despatches sent to England, Spain and other countries by their representatives in various parts of Germany. (4) Controversial writings or treatises written to attack or defend a given position, largely the product of the Reformation period. (5) The correspondence of eminent and observant persons. (6) An enormous mass of personal impressions taking the form of Commentaries, Memoirs and Diaries (_Tagebucher_). Moreover, important personages still find eulogistic biographers and defenders, e.g. the fanciful writings about the emperor Maximilian I. or Pufendorf's _De rebus gestis Friderici Wilhelmi Magni electoris Brandenburgici_.

Through the dust aroused by the great Reformation controversy appear the dim beginnings of the scientific spirit in the writing of history, and in this connexion the name of Aventinus, "the Bavarian Herodotus," may be mentioned. But for many years hardly any progress was made in this direction. Even if they possessed the requisite qualifications the historiographers attached to the courts of the emperor Charles V. and of lesser potentates could not afford to be impartial. Thus new histories were written and old ones unearthed, collected and printed, but no attempt was made to criticize and collate the manuscripts of the past, or to present two sides of a question in the writings of the present. Among the collections of authorities made during the 16th and 17th centuries those of J. Pistorius (Frankfort, 1583-1607), of E. Lindenbrog (Frankfort, 1609) and of M. Freher (Frankfort, 1600-1611), may be noticed, although these were only put together and printed in the most haphazard and unconnected fashion. Passing thus through these two centuries we reach the beginning of the 18th century and the work done for German historical scholarship by the philosopher Leibnitz, who sought to do for his own country what Muratori was doing for Italy. For some years it had been recognized that the collection and arrangement of the authorities for German history was too great an undertaking for any one man, and societies under very influential patronage were founded for this purpose. But very slight results attended these elaborate schemes, although their failure did not deter Leibnitz from pursuing the same end. The two chief collections which were issued by the philosopher are the _Accessiones historicae_ (1698-1700) and the _Scriptores rerum Brunsvicensium_; the latter of these, containing documents centring round the history of the Welf family, was published in three volumes at Hanover (1707-1711). Leibnitz worked at another collection, the _Origines Guelficae_, which was completed and issued by his pupils (Hanover, 1750-1780), and also at _Annales imperii occidentis Brunsvicenses_, which, although the most valuable collection of the kind yet made, was not published until edited by G. H. Pertz (Hanover, 1843-1846). Other collections followed those of Leibnitz, among which may be mentioned the _Corpus historicum medii aevi_ of J. G. Eccard (Leipzig, 1723) and the _Scriptores rerum Germanicarum_ of J. B. Mencke (Leipzig, 1728). But these collections are merely heaps of historical material, good and bad; the documents therein were not examined and they are now quite superseded. They give, however, evidence of the great industry of their authors, and are the foundations upon which modern German scholarship has built.

In the 19th century the scientific spirit received a great impetus from the German system of education, one feature of which was that the universities began to require original work for some of their degrees. In this field of scientific research the Germans were the pioneers, and in it they are still pre-eminent, with Ranke as their most famous name and the _Monumenta Germaniae historica_ as their greatest production. The _Monumenta_ is a critical and ordered collection of documents relating to the history of Germany between 500 and 1500. It owes its origin mainly to the efforts of the statesman Stein, who was responsible for the foundation of the _Gesellschaft fur altere deutsche Geschichtskunde_, under the auspices of which the work was begun. The _Gesellschaft_ was established in 1819, and, the editorial work having been entrusted to G. H. Pertz, the first volume of the _Monumenta_ was published in 1826. The work was divided into five sections: _Scriptores_, _Leges_, _Diplomata_, _Epistolae_ and _Antiquitates_, but it was many years before anything was done with regard to the two last-named sections. In the three remaining ones, however, folio volumes were published regularly, and by 1909 thirty folio volumes of _Scriptores_, five of _Leges_ and one of _Diplomata imperii_ had appeared. But meanwhile a change of organization had taken place. When Pertz resigned his editorial position in 1874 and the _Gesellschaft_ was dissolved, twenty-four folio volumes had been published. The Prussian Academy of Sciences now made itself responsible for the continuance of the work, and a board of direction was appointed, the presidents of which were successively G. Waitz, W. Wattenbach, E. Dummler and O. Holder-Egger. Soon afterwards as money became more plentiful the scope of work was extended; the production of the folio volumes continued, but the five sections were subdivided and in each of these a series of quarto volumes was issued. The titles of these new sections give a sufficient idea of their contents. The _Scriptores_ are divided into _Auctores antiquissimi_, _Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum_, _Scriptores rerum Langobardicarum et Italicarum_, _Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum_, _Gesta pontificum Romanorum_ and _Deutsche Chroniken_, or _Scriptores qui vernacula lingua usi sunt_. The _Leges_ are divided into _Leges nationum Germanicarum_, _Capitularia regum Francorum_, _Concilia_, _Constitutiones imperatorum et regum_ and _Formulae_. Three quarto volumes of _Diplomata regum et imperatorum Germaniae_ and one of _Diplomata Karolingorum_ had been published by 1909. Work was also begun upon the _Antiquitates_ and the _Epistolae_. The sections of the former are _Poetae Latini medii aevi_, _Libri confraternitatum_ and _Necrologia Germaniae_, and of the latter _Epistolae saeculi XIII._ and _Epistolae Merovingici et Karolini aevi_. Meanwhile the publication of the _Scriptores_ proper continues, although the thirty-first and subsequent volumes are in quarto and not in folio, and the number of volumes in the whole undertaking is continually being increased. The archives of the _Gesellschaft_ have been published in twelve volumes, and a large number of volumes of the _Neues Archiv_ have appeared. Some of the MSS. have been printed in facsimile, and an index to the _Monumenta_, edited by O. Holder-Egger and K. Zeumer, appeared in 1890. The writings of the more important chroniclers have been published separately, and many of them have been translated into German.

It will thus be seen that the ground covered by the _Monumenta_ is enormous. The volumes of the _Scriptores_ contain not only the domestic chroniclers, but also selections from the work of foreign writers who give information about the history of Germany--for example, the Englishman Matthew Paris. In the main these writings are arranged in chronological order. Each has been edited by an expert, and the various introductions give evidence of the number of MSS. collated and the great pains taken to ensure textual accuracy on the part of the different editors, among whom may be mentioned Mommsen and Lappenberg. Other great names in German historical scholarship have also assisted in this work. In addition to Waitz the _Leges_ section has enjoyed the services of F. Bluhme and of H. Brunner, and the _Diplomata_ section of T. Sickel, H. Bresslau and E. Muhlbacher.

The progress of the _Monumenta_ stimulated the production of other works of a like nature, and among the smaller collections of authorities which appeared during the 19th century two are worthy of mention. These are the _Fontes rerum Germanicarum_, edited by J. F. Bohmer (Stuttgart, 1843-1868), a collection of sources of the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries, and the _Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum_, edited by Ph. Jaffe (Berlin, 1864-1873). Another development followed the production of the _Monumenta_, this being the establishment in most of the German states of societies the object of which was to foster the study of local history. Reference may be made to a _Verein_ for this purpose in Saxony and to others in Silesia and in Mecklenburg. Much has also been done in Prussia, in Brandenburg, in Bavaria, in Hanover, in Wurttemberg and in Baden, and collections of authorities have been made by competent scholars, of which the _Geschichtsquellen der Provinz Sachsen und angrenzender Gebiete_ (Halle, 1870, fol.), which extends to forty volumes, the smaller _Scriptores rerum Prussicarum_ (Leipzig, 1861-1874), and the seventy-seven volumes of the _Publikationen aus den koniglichen preussischen Staatsarchiven, veranlasst und unterstutzt durch die konigliche Archiverwaltung_ (Leipzig, 1878, fol.), may be cited as examples. The cities have followed the same path and their archives are being thoroughly examined. In 1836 an _Urkundenbuch_ of Frankfort was published, and this example has been widely followed, the work done in Cologne, in Bremen and in Mainz being perhaps specially noticeable. Moreover an historical commission at Munich has published twenty-eight volumes in the series _Die Chroniken der deutschen Stadte vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig, 1862, fol.). Lastly, many documents relating to the great families of Germany, among them those of Hohenzollern and of Wittelsbach, have been carefully edited and given to the world.

With this great mass of material collected, sifted and edited by scholars of the highest standing it is not surprising that modern works on the history of Germany are stupendous in number and are generally of profound learning, and this in spite of the fact that some German historians--Gregorovius, Pauli and Lappenberg, for example--have devoted their time to researches into the history of foreign lands.

The earliest period is dealt with by K. Zeuss in _Die Deutschen und
die Nachbarstamme_ (Munich, 1837; new ed., Gottingen, 1904); and then
by F. Dahn in his _Urgeschichte der germanischen und romanischen
Volker_ (Berlin, 1880-1889) and his _Die Konige der Germanen_, volumes
of which have appeared at intervals between 1861 and 1909.

The Carolingian time is covered by E. Dummler's _Geschichte des
ostfrankischen Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888), and then follow Ranke's
_Jahrbucher des deutschen Reichs unter dem sachsischen Hause_ (Berlin,
1837-1840), W. von Giesebrecht's _Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit_
(1855-1888), and F. Raumer's _Geschichte der Hohenstaufen_.

For the reigns of Lothair the Saxon and Conrad III. P. Jaffe's books,
_Geschichte des deutschen Reiches unter Lothar dem Sachsen_ (Berlin,
1843) and _Geschichte des deutschen Reiches unter Conrad III._
(Hanover, 1845), may be consulted.

The chief histories on the period between the fall of the Hohenstaufen
and the Renaissance are: T. Lindner, _Deutsche Geschichte unter den
Habsburgern und Luxemburgern_ (Stuttgart, 1888-1893); O. Lorenz,
_Deutsche Geschichte im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert_ (Vienna, 1863-1867);
J. Aschbach, _Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds_ (Hamburg, 1838-1845); K.
Fischer, _Deutsches Leben und deutsche Zustande von der
Hohenstaufenzeit bis ins Reformationszeitalter_ (Gotha, 1884); V. von
Kraus, _Deutsche Geschichte im Ausgange des Mittelalters_ (Stuttgart,
1888-1905), and A. Bachmann, _Deutsche Reichsgeschichte im Zeitalter
Friedrichs III. und Maximilians I._ (Leipzig, 1884-1894).

The two greatest works on the Reformation period are L. von Ranke's
_Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation_ (Leipzig, 1882) and
J. Janssen's _Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des
Mittelalters_ (1897-1903). Other works which may be mentioned are: F.
B. von Bucholtz, _Geschichte der Regierung Ferdinands I._ (Vienna,
1831-1838); C. Egelhaaf, _Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der
Reformation_ (Berlin, 1893), and F. von Bezold, _Geschichte der
deutschen Reformation_ (Berlin, 1890).

For the years after the Reformation we have Ranke, _Zur deutschen
Geschichte--Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum 30-jahrigen Kriege_ (Leipzig,
1888); M. Ritter, _Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der
Gegenreformation und des dreissigjahrigen Krieges_ (Stuttgart, 1887,
fol.); G. Droysen, _Geschichte der Gegenreformation_ (Berlin, 1893);
A. Gindely, _Rudolf II. und seine Zeit_ (Prague, 1862-1868) and
_Geschichte des dreissigjahrigen Krieges_ (Prague, 1869-1880).
Gindely's book is, of course, only one among an enormous number of
works on the Thirty Years' War.

For the period leading up to the time of Frederick the Great we have
B. Erdmannsdorffer, _Deutsche Geschichte vom Westfalischen Frieden bis
zum Regierungsantritt Friedrichs des Grossen_ (Berlin, 1892-1893); and
then follow Ranke, _Zur Geschichte von Osterreich und Preussen
zwischen den Friedensschlussen von Aachen und Hubertusburg_ (Leipzig,
1875) and _Die deutschen Machte und der Furstenbund_ (Leipzig,
1871-1872); K. Biedermann, _Deutschland im 18. Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig,
1854-1880); W. Oncken, _Das Zeitalter Friedrichs des Grossen_ (Berlin,
1880-1882); A. von Arneth, _Geschichte Maria Theresias_ (Vienna,
1863-1879); L. Hausser, _Deutsche Geschichte vom Tode Friedrichs des
Grossen bis zur Grundung des Deutschen Bundes_ (Berlin, 1861-1863),
and K. T. von Heigel, _Deutsche Geschichte vom Tode Friedrichs des
Grossen bis zur Auflosung des alten Reichs_ (Stuttgart, 1899, fol.).

For the 19th century we may mention: H. von Treitschke, _Deutsche
Geschichte im 19. Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig, 1879-1894); H. von Sybel,
_Die Begrundung des deutschen Reiches durch Wilhelm I._ (Munich,
1889-1894); G. Kaufmann, _Politische Geschichte Deutschlands im 19.
Jahrhundert_ (Berlin, 1900), and H. von Zwiedeneck-Sudenhorst,
_Deutsche Geschichte von der Auflosung des alten bis zur Grundung des
neuen Reiches_ (Stuttgart, 1897-1905). These are perhaps the most
important, but there are many others of which the following is a
selection: K. Fischer, _Die Nation und der Bundestag_ (Leipzig, 1880);
K. Klupfel, _Geschichte der deutschen Einheitsbestrebungen bis zu
ihrer Erfullung_ (Berlin, 1872-1873); H. Blum, _Die deutsche
Revolution_ 1848-1849 (Florence, 1897) and _Das deutsche Reich zur
Zeit Bismarcks_ (Leipzig, 1893); W. Maurenbrecher, _Grundung des
deutschen Reiches_ (Leipzig, 1892); H. Friedjung, _Der Kampf um die
Vorherrschaft in Deutschland_ 1859-1866 (Stuttgart, 1897); C. von
Kaltenborn, _Geschichte der deutschen Bundesverhaltnisse und
Einheitsbestrebungen von 1806-1856_ (Berlin, 1857); J. Jastrow,
_Geschichte des deutschen Einheitstraumes und seiner Erfullung_
(Berlin, 1885), and P. Kloppel, _Dreissig Jahre deutscher
Verfassungsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1900).

For the most recent developments of German politics see H. Schulthess,
_Europaischer Geschichtskalender_ (Nordlingen, 1861, fol., a work
similar to the English _Annual Register_); W. Muller and K.
Wippermann, _Politische Geschichte der Gegenwart_ (Berlin, 1868,
fol.); the _Statistisches Jahrbuch des deutschen Reichs_, and A. L.
Lowell, _Governments and Parties in Continental Europe_ (1896).

A good general history of Germany is the _Bibliothek deutscher
Geschichte_, edited by H. von Zwiedeneck-Sudenhorst (Stuttgart, 1876,
fol.). Other general histories, although on a smaller scale, are K.
Lamprecht, _Deutsche Geschichte_ (Berlin, 1891-1896); O. Kammel,
_Deutsche Geschichte_ (Dresden, 1889); K. Biedermann, _Deutsche Volks-
und Kulturgeschichte_ (Wiesbaden, 1885); T. Lindner, _Geschichte des
deutschen Volks_ (Stuttgart, 1894); the _Handbuch der deutschen
Geschichte_, edited by B. Gebhardt (Stuttgart, 1901), and K. W.
Nitzsch, _Geschichte des deutschen Volkes bis zum Augsburger
Religionsfrieden_ (Leipzig, 1883-1885).

Special reference is deservedly made to three works of the highest
value. These are J. G. Droysen's great _Geschichte der preussischen
Politik_ (Berlin, 1855-1886); the _Deutsche Reichstagsakten_, the
first series of which was published at Munich (1867, fol.) and the
second at Gotha (1893-1901); and the collection known as the _Regesta
imperii_, which owes its existence to the labours of J. F. Bohmer.
Nearly the whole of the period between 751 and 1347 is covered by
these volumes; the charters and other documents of some of the German
kings being edited by Bohmer himself, and new and enlarged editions of
certain sections have been brought out by J. Ficker, E. Winkelmann and
others. Much useful information on the history of different periods is
contained in the lives of individual emperors and others. Among these
are H. Prutz, _Kaiser Friedrich I._ (Danzig, 1871-1874); F. W.
Schirrmacher, _Kaiser Friedrich II._ (Gottingen, 1859-1865); H.
Ulmann, _Kaiser Maximilian I._ (Stuttgart, 1884-1891); F. von Hurter,
_Geschichte Kaiser Ferdinands II._ (Schaffhausen, 1857-1864), and H.
Blum, _Furst Bismarck und seine Zeit_ (Munich, 1895). There is also
the great series of volumes, primary and supplementary, forming the
_Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_ (Leipzig, 1875, fol.), in which the
word _deutsche_ is interpreted in the widest possible sense.

Apart from political histories there are useful collections of laws
and other official documents of importance, and also a large number of
valuable works on the laws and constitutions of the Germans and on
German institutions generally. Among the collections are M. Goldast,
_Collectio constitutionum imperialium_ (1613; new and enlarged
edition, 1673); the _Capitulationes imperatorum et regum
Romana-Germanorum_ (Strassburg, 1851) of Johann Limnaus, and the
_Corpus juris Germanici antiqui_ (Berlin, 1824) of F. Walter.
Collections dealing with more recent history are J. C. Glaser's
_Archiv des norddeutschen Bundes. Sammlung aller Gesetze, Vertrage und
Aktenstucke, die Verhaltnisse des norddeutschen Bundes betreffend_
(Berlin, 1867); W. Jungermann's _Archiv des deutschen Reiches_
(Berlin, 1873, fol.), and the _Acta Borussica. Denkmaler der
preussischen Staatsverwaltung im 18. Jahrhundert_ (Berlin, 1892,
fol.). Mention may also be made of C. C. Homeyer's edition of the
_Sachsenspiegel_ and L. A. von Lassberg's edition of the
_Schwabenspiegel_; the many volumes of Wallenstein's letters and
papers; the eighteen volumes of the _Urkunden und Aktenstucke zur
Geschichte des Kurfursten Friedrich Wilhelm von Brandenburg_ (Berlin,
1864, fol.); and the thirty volumes of the _Politische Korrespondenz
Friedrichs des Grossen_ (Berlin, 1879-1905). Modern writers on these
subjects distinguished for their learning are G. Waitz (_Deutsche
Verfassungsgeschichte_, Kiel and Berlin, 1844, fol.) and G. L. von
Maurer (_Geschichte der Stadteverfassung in Deutschland_, Erlangen,
1869-1871, and other cognate writings), their works being valuable not
only for the early institutions of the Germans, but also for those of
other Teutonic peoples. Other works on the German constitution and
German laws are K. F. Eichhorn, _Deutsche Staats- und
Rechtsgeschichte_ (Gottingen, 1843-1844); R. Schroder, _Lehrbuch der
deutschen Rechtsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1889 and again 1902); H.
Brunner, _Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1887-1892), and
_Grundzuge der deutschen Rechtsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1901-1903), and
E. Mayer, _Deutsche und franzosische Verfassungsgeschichte vom 9.-11.
Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig, 1899).

Manners and customs are dealt with in J. Scherr's _Deutsche Kultur-
und Sittengeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1852-1853); J. Lippert's _Deutsche
Sittengeschichte_ (Vienna and Prague, 1889); O. Henne am Rhyn's
_Kulturgeschichte des deutschen Volkes_ (Berlin, 1886); the
_Geschichte des deutschen Volkes und seiner Kultur im Mittelalter_
(Leipzig, 1891-1898) of H. Gerdes, and F. von Loher's
_Kulturgeschichte der Deutschen im Mittelalter_ (Munich, 1891-1894).
Among the works on husbandry may be mentioned: K. Bucher, _Die
Entstehung der Volkswirtschaft_ (Tubingen, 1893); K. T. von
Inama-Sternegg, _Deutsche Wirtschaftsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1879-1901),
and K. Lamprecht, _Deutsches Wirtschaftsleben im Mittelalter_
(Leipzig, 1886). For antiquities see M. Heyne, _Funf Bucher deutscher
Hausaltertumer von den altesten geschichtlichen Zeiten bis zum 16.
Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig, 1899-1903), and L. Lindenschmit, _Handbuch der
deutschen Altertumskunde_ (Brunswick, 1880-1889). For the history of
the German church see A. Hauck, _Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands_
(Leipzig, 1887-1903); F. W. Rettberg, _Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands_
(Gottingen, 1846-1848), and J. Friedrich, _Kirchengeschichte
Deutschlands_ (Bamberg, 1867-1869). For finance see K. D. Hullmann,
_Deutsche Finanzgeschichte des Mittelalters_ (1805); for the
administration of justice, O. Franklin, _Das Reichshofgericht im
Mittelalter_ (Weimar, 1867-1869), and A. Stolzel, _Die Entwicklung des
gelehrten Richtertums in deutschen Territorien_ (Stuttgart, 1872); for
the towns and their people see J. Jastrow, _Die Volkszahl deutscher
Stadte zu Ende des Mittelalters und zu Beginn der Neuzeit_ (Berlin,
1886); F. W. Barthold, _Geschichte der deutschen Stadte und des
deutschen Burgertums_ (Leipzig, 1850-1854), and K. Hegel, _Stadte und
Gilden der germanischen Volker im Mittelalter_ (Leipzig, 1891); and
for manufactures and commerce see J. Falke, _Die Geschichte des
deutschen Handels_ (Leipzig, 1859-1860); H. A. Mascher, _Das deutsche
Gewerbewesen von der fruhesten Zeit bis auf die Gegenwart_ (Potsdam,
1866); F. W. Stahl, _Das deutsche Handwerk_ (Giessen, 1874); the
numerous writings on the history of the Hanseatic League and other
works. The nobles and the other social classes have each their
separate histories, among these being C. F. F. von Strantz,
_Geschichte des deutschen Adels_ (Breslau, 1845), and K. H. Roth von
Schreckenstein, _Die Ritterwurde und der Ritterstand_ (Freiburg,
1866).

The Germans have produced some excellent historical atlases, among
them K. von Spruner's _Historisch-geographischer Handatlas_ (Gotha,
1853); a new edition of this by T. Menke called _Handatlas fur die
Geschichte des Mittelalters und der neueren Zeit_ (Gotha, 1880), and
G. Droysen's _Allgemeiner historischer Handatlas_ (Leipzig, 1886). The
historical geography of Germany is dealt with in B. Knull's
_Historische Geographie Deutschlands im Mittelalter_ (Breslau, 1903);
in F. H. Muller's _Die deutschen Stamme und ihre Fursten_ (Hamburg,
1852), and in many other works referring to the different parts of the
country.

English books on the history of Germany are not very numerous. There
is a short _History of Germany_ by James Sime (1874), another by E. F.
Henderson (1902), and _A History of Germany 1715-1815_ by C. T.
Atkinson (1909). H. A. L. Fisher's _Medieval Empire_ (1898) is very
useful for the earlier period, and J. Bryce's _Holy Roman Empire_ is
indispensable. There is a translation of Janssen's _Geschichte_ by M.
A. Mitchell and A. M. Christie (1896, fol.), and there are useful
chapters in the different volumes of the _Cambridge Modern History_.
Two English historians have distinguished themselves by their work on
special periods: Carlyle with his _History of Friedrich II., called
the Great_ (1872-1873), and W. Robertson with his _History of the
Reign of Charles V._ (1820). There is also E. Armstrong's Charles V.
(London, 1902). Among German historical periodicals are the
_Historische Zeitschrift_, long associated with the name of H. von
Sybel, and the _Historisches Jahrbuch_.

In guides to the historical sources and to modern historical works
Germany is well served. There is the _Quellenkunde der deutschen
Geschichte_ (Leipzig, 1906) of Dahlmann-Waitz, a most compendious
volume, and the learned _Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im
Mittelalter_ (Berlin, 1893-1894) of W. Wattenbach; A. Potthast's
_Bibliotheca historica medii aevi_ (Berlin, 1896), and the
_Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen seit der Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts_
(Berlin, 1886-1887) of O. Lorenz and A. Goldmann. (A. W. H.*)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] So called from the badge worn by the knights (_Lowenritter_) who
composed it.

[2] The best account, in English, of the development of the
Zollverein is in Percy Ashley's _Modern Tariff History_ (London,
1904).

[3] The only formal change is that the duchy of Lauenburg, which
since 1865 had been governed by the king of Prussia as a separate
principality (but without a vote in the Bundesrat), was in 1876
incorporated in the Prussian province of Schleswig-Holstein.

[4] See _Annual Register_ (1908), pp. 289 et seq.

[5] The whole question is exhaustively treated from the Danish point
of view in _La Question de Slesvig_ (Copenhagen, 1906), a collective
work edited by F. de Jessens.

[6] Reinhard Karl Friedrich von Dalwigk (1802-1880). Though a
Lutheran, he had been accused in 1854 of an excessive subserviency to
the Roman Catholic Church. He was responsible for the policy which
threatened to involve the grand-duchy of Hesse in the fate of the
Electorate in 1866. But it was due to his diplomatic skill that Upper
Hesse was saved for the grand-duke.

[7] In 1899, following the Spanish-American War, Germany purchased
the Caroline, Pelew and Marianne Islands from Spain; in 1899-1900 by
agreement with Great Britain and America she acquired the two largest
of the Samoan islands, renouncing in favour of Britain her
protectorate over certain of the Solomon islands.

[8] The elevation of Count Bulow to the rank of prince immediately
after the crisis was significantly compared with the same honour
bestowed on Bismarck at Versailles in 1871.

[9] He was born on November 29, 1856, the son of a wealthy Rhenish
landowner, and grandson of Moritz August von Bethmann-Hollweg
(1795-1877), professor of law at Bonn, ennobled in 1840, and from
1858 to 1862 minister of education and religion at Berlin. Herr von
Bethmann-Hollweg studied law at Strassburg, Leipzig and Berlin,
entered the Prussian civil service in 1882, and, passing successfully
through the various stages of a German administrative career, became
governor (Oberprasident) of the province of Brandenburg in 1899. In
1905 he became Prussian minister of the interior. Two years later he
succeeded Count Posadowsky as imperial secretary of state for the
interior and representative of the imperial chancellor, and was at
the same time made vice-president of the council of Prussian
ministers, an office and title which had been in abeyance for some
years and were now again suppressed.

GERMERSHEIM, a fortified town of Germany in Rhenish Bavaria, at the confluence of the Queich and the Rhine, 8 m. S.W. of Speyer. Pop. (1905) 5914. It possesses a Roman Catholic and an Evangelical church, a synagogue, a progymnasium and a hospital. The industries include fishing, shipbuilding and brewing. Germersheim existed as a Roman stronghold under the name of _Vicus Julius_. The citadel was rebuilt by the emperor Conrad II., but the town itself was founded in 1276 by the emperor Rudolph I., who granted it the rights of a free imperial city. From 1330 to 1622, when it was conquered by Austria, the town formed part of the Palatinate of the Rhine. From 1644 to 1650 it was in the possession of France; but on the conclusion of the peace of Westphalia it was again joined to the Palatinate. In 1674 it was captured and devastated by the French under Turenne, and after the death of the elector Charles (1685) it was claimed by the French as a dependency of Alsace. As a consequence there ensued the disastrous Germersheim war of succession, which lasted till the peace of Ryswick in 1697. Through the intervention of the pope in 1702, the French, on payment of a large sum, agreed to vacate the town, and in 1715 its fortifications were rebuilt. On the 3rd of July 1744 the French were defeated there by the imperial troops, and on the 19th and 22nd of July 1793 by the Austrians. In 1835 the new town was built, and the present fortifications begun.

See Probst, _Geschichte der Stadt und Festung Germersheim_ (Speyer,
1898).

GERMISTON, a town of the Transvaal, 9 m. E. of Johannesburg. Pop. of the municipality (1904) 29,477, of whom 9123 were whites. It lies 5478 ft. above the sea, in the heart of the Witwatersrand gold-mining district, and is an important railway junction. The station, formerly called Elandsfontein Junction, is the meeting-point of lines from the ports of the Cape and Natal, and from Johannesburg, Pretoria and Delagoa Bay. Though possessing a separate municipality, Germiston is practically a suburb of Johannesburg (q.v.).

GERMONIUS, ANASTASIUS [ANASTASE GERMON] (1551-1627), canon lawyer, diplomatist and archbishop of Tarantaise, belonged to the family of the marquises of Ceve, in Piedmont, where he was born. As archdeacon at Turin he was a member of the commission appointed by Pope Clement VIII. to edit the _Liber septimus decretalium_; and he also wrote _Paratitla_ on the five books of the _Decretals of Gregory IX._ He represented the duke of Savoy at the court of Rome under Clement VIII. and Paul V., and was ambassador to Spain under Kings Philip III. and IV. He died on the 4th of August 1627. Germonius is best known for his treatise on ambassadors, _De legatis principum et populorum libri tres_ (Rome, 1627). The book is diffuse, pedantic and somewhat heavy in style, but valuable historically as written by a theorist who was also an expert man of affairs. (See DIPLOMACY.)

GERO (c. 900-965), margrave of the Saxon east mark, was probably a member of an influential Saxon family. In 937 he was entrusted by the German king Otto, afterwards the emperor Otto the Great, with the defence of the eastern frontier of Saxony against the Wends and other Slavonic tribes; a duty which he discharged with such ability and success that in a few years he extended the Saxon frontier almost to the Oder, and gained the chief credit for the suppression of a rising of the conquered peoples in a great victory on the 16th of October 955. In 963 he defeated the Lusatians, compelled the king of the Poles to recognize the supremacy of the German king, and extended the area of his mark so considerably that after his death it was partitioned into three, and later into five marks. Gero, who is said to have made a journey to Rome, died on the 20th of May 965, and was buried in the convent of Gernrode which he had founded on his Saxon estates. He is referred to by the historian Widukind as a _preses_, and is sometimes called the "great margrave." He has been accused of treachery and cruelty, is celebrated in song and story, and is mentioned as the "marcgrave Gere" in the _Nibelungenlied_.

See Widukind, "Res gestae Saxonicae," in the _Monumenta Germaniae
historica_. _Scriptores_, Band iii.; O. von Heinemann, _Markgraf Gero_
(Brunswick, 1860).

GEROLSTEIN, a village and climatic health resort of Germany, in the Prussian Rhine Province, attractively situated on the Kyll, in the Eifel range, 1100 ft. above the sea, 58 m. W. of Andernach by rail, and at the junction of lines to Treves and St Vith. The castle of Gerolstein, built in 1115 and now in ruins, affords a fine view of the Kyllthal. Gerolstein is celebrated for its lithia waters, which are largely exported. Pop. (1900) 1308.