Caudillo, Duce & Führer

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Enosis & Anschluss

Enosis (pronounced ih-noh-sis, ee-noh-sis or e-naw-sees (Greek))

(1) A movement for securing the political union of Greece and Cyprus.

(2) A genus of grass skippers (Hesperiinae) butterflies. It is in the tribe Moncini.

1935–1940: From the Modern Greek énōsis from the Classical Greek hénōsis (union), equivalent to henō-, variant stem of henoûn to unify (derivative of hén, neuter of heîs (one) + -sis.  The suffix –sis (ultimately from Ancient Greek –σις) appeared in loanwords from Greek and was used to form from verbs, abstract nouns of action, process, state, condition etc.  It’s identical in meaning with the Latin –entia and the English -ing.  Etymologists note it’s not very productive, used only for borrowed terms from Ancient Greek, though there are also modern coinages based on Ancient Greek roots.

Anschluss (pronounced ahn-shloos)

Union (strongly associated with the 1938 political union of Austria with Germany).

1920-1925: From the German anschluss (variously translated as annexation; consolidation; joining together) and derived from the German anschliessen (to join).   The original German form was anschluß from anschließen (to join, unite).  The compound translated is on-to-a-schluss (closing).

Difference

Technically, enosis is the historic movement of various Greek communities living outside Greece to be incorporated (including the land they inhabit) into a unitary Greek state.  Enosis is related to the Megali, a concept of a Greek nation which dominated Greek politics after the creation of the modern Greek state in 1830.  For military and political reasons, the Megali project was never realised and enosis is now associated almost exclusively with the movement within the Greek-Cypriot community for a union of Cyprus into Greece.  The historic moment for that probably passed in 1960 with the creation of the Republic of Cyprus which was not incorporated into Greece.  The 1974 Turkish resulted in geographic partition with Turkey (now the Republic of Türkiye) occupying northern Cyprus and the enosis movement faded to oblivion.

Anschluss is now used almost exclusively to refer to the annexation of Austria into Nazi Germany on 12 March 1938.  The word's German spelling, until the German orthography reform of 1996, was Anschluß and it was also known as the Anschluss Österreichs.  Anschluss translates as "joinder", "connection", "unification" or "political union" whereas annektierung means “military annexation”.  Although the latter was (technically) an accurate description of what happened in 1938, it has never been widely adopted to describe the events.  The use of anschluss by the Nazis suited their propaganda, suggesting as it did the union was marriage rather than rape and many modern historians have been inclined to agree.  Two generations would pass before Austrians began seriously to dissect the post-war consensus that their country had been a victim.

Lindsay Lohan in Austria in Grecian-inspired gown, The White Party, Linz, Austria, July 2014.

The Anschluss was dissolved when the Third Reich (and thus the German state) ceased to exist at the end of World War II (1939-1945).  On the model of Germany & Berlin, Austria was divided into American, British, French and Soviet zones of occupation and governed on a quasi-federal basis by the administrators in the zones and, for certain matters, a joint Commission for Austria.  In 1955, after years of difficult talks, the Soviet Union agreed to Austrian independence and withdrawal of its troops on the condition the Western powers did likewise.  Officially, Austrian neutrality was not a condition imposed by Moscow but it's long been speculated their acquiescence was gained by an informal understanding (secret protocols were by then out of fashion) Vienna would do exactly that.  In October 1955, after all occupying forces had withdrawn, Austria's full independence was recognized and, by an act of parliament, Austria declared its "permanent neutrality" which endures to this day, a legacy of which is that the country is not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) although it has since 1995 been part of the non-military "Partnership for Peace" programme with which NATO maintains contacts with certain non-members (some of which have subsequently joined the military alliance).

1938 Mercedes-Benz G4 (W31), Wehrmacht command vehicle during the Anschluss.

Although Mercedes-Benz prefers not much to dwell on the details of its activities between 1933-1945, one of the remarkable vehicles it built during the era was the G4 (W31).  The factory developed three-axle cross-country vehicles for military use during the 1920s but after testing a number of the prototype G1s, the army declined to place an order, finding them too big, too expensive and too heavy for their intended purpose.  Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) however, as drawn to big, impressive machines as he was to grandiose, representational architecture, ordered them adopted as parade vehicles and the army soon acquired a fleet of the updated G4, used eventually not only on ceremonial occasions but also as staff and command vehicles, two even specially configured, one as a baggage car and the other a communications centre, packed with radio-telephony.  Eventually, between 1934-1939, fifty-seven were built, originally exclusively for the OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (Armed Forces High Command)) and OKH (Oberkommando des Heeres (Army High Command)) but one was gift from Hitler to Generalissimo Francisco Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975).  The Spanish G4, one of three which still exists, was restored and remains in the royal garage in Madrid.  According to factory records, all were built with 5.0 litre (306 cubic inch), 5.3 litre (326) & 5.4 litre (330) litre straight-eight engines but there is an unverified report of interview with Hitler’s long-time chauffeur, Erich Kempka (1910-1975), suggesting one for the Führer’s exclusive use was built with one of the supercharged 7.7 litre (468 cubic inch) straight-eights used in the 770K Grosser.  The story is widely thought apocryphal, no evidence of such a one-off ever having be sighted and no supporting documents have ever appeared.

Baumkuchen

Baumkuchen (pronounced baun-kooch-en)

A kind of layered cake, traditionally baked on a spit, in which the layers resemble concentric tree rings.

Circa mid-1800s: From the Modern German baumkuchen (literally “tree cake”).  The construct was Baum (tree) +‎ kuchen (cake), so-named because the concentric-ring layers resemble tree rings.  The genitive was saumkuchens, the plural baumkuchen.

The tree cake

Although the word baumkuchen appears not to have been used before being noted in Bavarian menus and newspapers in the mid-nineteenth century, similar cakes were documented as early as 1581.  Both Germans and Hungarians have long claimed to have created the baumkuchen, the latter suggesting it a variation of a traditional Hungarian wedding cake, the pastry kürtőskalács (chimney cake).  In retaliation, the Germans cite the recipe in Max Rumpolt’s Ein new Kochbuch (A New Cookbook) (1581).  However, it may be a moot point because the method was already known in Antiquity, records for similar constructions found in the texts from both Ancient Greece and Rome.

Labour-intensive and thus costly, baumkuchen is made on a spit by assembling cakes of alternating sizes which are brushed evenly with thin layers of batter, the spit then rotated over heat, traditionally a wood fire.  Each layer must dry before another is poured so when the cake is sliced, each layer is divided from the next by a golden line, resembling the growth rings of a tree.  Modern baumkuchen may have only a few layers but the traditional method called for twenty or more, the most lavish of which could weigh over one hundred pounds (45+kg) and be 3-4 feet (1-1.25m) high.  Popular in Japan, as bāmukūhen (バームクーヘン), it’s often served to wedding guests because, when sliced, it recalls the shape of a ring.

Baumkuche, Horcher, Madrid.

Apart from the visual impact, a baumkuchen is an experience of intense taste and texture.  As bakers know, it’s the thin caramelized layer sticking to the bottom of the pan that is the best tasting part of a cake because that’s where the fats and sugars accumulate and a baumkuchen is a cake made wholly of layer upon layer of this richly flavored delicacy.  While it’s true a conventionally shaped cake can somewhat emulate this if baked in layers, the finer product is the cylindrical baumkuchen which can be made only on the rotating spit used usually for broiling roasts.  However, that very intensity of taste is because of density and for that reason, should be served in smaller slices than most cakes.  Famously, it's a signature offering at Horcher in Madrid.

Sliced baumkuche, Horcher, Madrid.

Horcher was opened in Berlin in 1904 by wine merchant Gustav Horcher (1873-1931), ownership passing to his son Otto after his death.  It began as a small, intimate restaurant offering simple, traditional dishes (notably game) but later evolved to cater to the upper end of the market.  Otto Horcher offered a good table and maintained connections with the Nazi hierarchy, the Horcher a favourite of Hermann Göring (1893-1946) and many Luftwaffe generals.  Those connections paid off.  After the Anschluss (the annexing of Austria by the German Reich in 1938), Otto Horcher acquired The Three Hussars in Vienna and, after the occupation of France in 1940, he took over Maxim's in Paris.

Horcher, Madrid.

Closure was forced on Horcher and many other restaurants in 1943 after the Nazi's propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945) attempted to shock the economy into total-war production.  Typically, this was opposed by Göring who retaliated by threatening to have Horcher re-opened as a Luftwaffe club but his star within the regime had long been waning and Goebbels ultimately prevailed.  Instead, he assisted Horcher to move to Madrid where it remains to this day, still in family ownership.  During the war, allied intelligence agencies identified as Horcher as a meeting point for German spies and overseas agents but it was one of many in both Madrid and Lisbon, both sides maintaining espionage operations in neutral nations.  After the war, the linkage continued, sometimes openly as Horcher remained popular with many former notables of the Third Reich but reports indicated it was also a place with at least passive involvement in activities such as arranging the escape of those wanted for war crimes and other matters, usually to more sympathetic régimes in South America.

Referendum

Referendum (pronounced ref-uh-ren-duhm)

(1) The principle or practice of referring measures proposed or passed by a legislature or executive authority to the vote of the electorate for approval or rejection; the submission of an issue of public importance to the direct vote of the electorate.

(2) A measure thus referred.

(3) The vote on such a measure.

(4) A poll of the members of a club, union, or other group to determine their views on some matter.

(5) In historic diplomatic use, a diplomat’s official's note to their government requesting instructions.

(6) In legal & diplomatic use (as ad referendum (To reference)), an indication that although the substantive issues have been agreed, some differences on matters of detail need still to be resolved.

1847: From the Latin referendum (something to be referred; that which ought to be announced), neuter future passive participle (gerundive) of referre (to bring back), the construct being the verb ferre (to bear, bring, carry) + re- (here used to mean “back”).  It was an inflection of referendus, gerundive of referō (I announce).  Modern use appears to have begun in 1847 to describe the voting process used by the Swiss cantons (provinces) to validate certain laws passed by a legislature and use extended to the English-speaking world in 1882.

The re- prefix was from the Middle English re-, from the circa 1200 Old French re-, from the Latin re- & red- (back; anew; again; against), from the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (again), a metathetic alteration of wert- (to turn).  It displaced the native English ed- & eft-.  A hyphen is not normally included in words formed using this prefix, except when the absence of a hyphen would (1) make the meaning unclear, (2) when the word with which the prefix is combined begins with a capital letter, (3) when the word with which the is combined with begins with another “re”, (4) when the word with which the prefix is combined with begins with “e”, (5) when the word formed is identical in form to another word in which re- does not have any of the senses listed above.  As late as the early twentieth century, the dieresis was sometimes used instead of a hyphen (eg reemerge) but this is now rare except when demanded for historic authenticity or if there’s an attempt deliberately to affect the archaic.  Re- may (and has) been applied to almost any verb and previously irregular constructions appear regularly in informal use; the exception is all forms of “be” and the modal verbs (can, should etc).  Although it seems certain the origin of the Latin re- is the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (which has a parallel in Umbrian re-), beyond that it’s uncertain and while it seems always to have conveyed the general sense of "back" or "backwards", there were instances where the precise was unclear and the prolific productivity in Classical Latin tended make things obscure.  The Latin prefix rĕ- was from the Proto-Italic wre (again) and had a parallel in the Umbrian re- but the etymology was always murky.   In use, there was usually at least the hint of the sense "back" or "backwards" but so widely was in used in Classical Latin and beyond that the exact meaning is sometimes not clear.  Etymologists suggest the origin lies either in (1) a metathesis (the transposition of sounds or letters in a word) of the primitive Indo-European wert- (to turn) or (2) the primitive Indo-European ure- (back), which was related to the Proto-Slavic rakъ (in the sense of “looking backwards”).

The word referendum illustrates the difference between the Latin constructs known as gerunds & gerundives and their English equivalents.  In Latin, gerunds are neuter singular nouns formed from verbs by appending -ndum to the stem whereas in English, gerunds are verbal nouns formed by adding an -ing.  The Latin legendum (reading) is for example formed from the verb legere (to read) while the English gerund is reading (read + -ing).  Because English gerunds are nouns, the preceding pronouns should take the possessive form (“we noticed him reading” (present participle)) but “we enjoyed his reading of that passage” (gerund).  By contrast, the Latin gerundive has the same form as a gerund but is used as an adjective and can take any number (singular or plural) and gender.  According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), there exists in English some sixty words which are unchanged from the original Latin (gerundives & gerunds) in a ratio of about two to one.  Some two-dozen are Latin phrases, noted from their continued use in legal jargon (such as capias ad respondendum (to enforce attendance at court) while the remainder are often from Medieval or Church Latin, unknown to Classical Latin.  Curiously, the OED was (at least earlier) ambivalent about whether referendum comes from a gerund or a gerundive but most agree a gerund it is and thus would have no plural in Latin so the rules of English plural construction would apply, creating referendums.  Were it a gerundive, the alternative plural in English could be referenda and that has attained some popularity but most authorities think this usually a misunderstanding based on the treatment of nouns (eg stadium & stadia). 

The meaning has of course shifted.  In Latin, a referendum was “a question to be referred to the people” but in modern European political discourse it was appropriated to describe the mechanics of the vote itself.  Had the original conventions of Latin be adhered to by those who followed. Such a thing would have been “a reference” but referendum is well understood and the original sense is now covered by the ubiquitous “terms of reference” and the preferred plural form is doubtlessly referendums although referenda is heard so often it may well have become an alternative unique to English.  Variations are actually not unusual: a neverendum is political slang for something which a government is never likely to submit to a vote and technically, a preferendum is a referendum in which more than two items or persons are being voted upon.

In modern use plebiscite has a similar meaning in modern use and by many is used interchangeably.  It was from the Latin plebiscita, which originally meant “decree of the Concilium Plebis (Plebeian Council)”, the popular assembly of the Roman Republic.  English gained the word from the Middle French plébiscite, from the Latin plebiscita from plebs & plebis (the common people) and the construct of the Latin plēbīscītum (decree of the plebs) was plēbī (for plēbis & plēbēī genitive singular of plēbs & plēbēs) + scītum (“resolution, decree”, the noun use of neuter of scītus, the past participle of scīscere (to enact, decree) (originally, to seek to know, learn)), inchoative of scīre (to know).  Despite some imprecision in modern use, there are places where some distinction is (at least to some extent) maintained, usually with a referendum being a vote binding upon a government whereas a plebiscite is merely indicative.  The initiative (usually in the form ballot initiative) is related in that it refers to a process (usually signatures on a form of petition) by which a matter may be submitted to a referendum.

Watched by an approving comrade Vyacheslav Molotov (1890–1986; Soviet foreign minister 1939-1949 & 1953-1956), comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) casts his vote in the 1937 election for the Supreme Soviet.  To the left, Comrade Marshal Kliment Voroshilov (1881–1969) watches Comrade Nikolai Yezhov (1895–1940, head of the NKVD 1936-1938).

Those voting in 1937 may have had high hopes for the future because, read literally, the 1936 Constitution of the Soviet Union (adopted 5 December 1936) described a democratic utopia.  Unfortunately, within months, comrade Stalin embarked on his Great Purge and turned his country into a kind of combination of prison camp and abattoir, many of those involved in drafting the constitution either sent to the Gulag or shot.  In 1937 the CPSU (Communist Party of the Soviet Union) was declared to have won 99% of the vote so it was not an exceptional result but the photograph is unusual in that it’s one of the few in which the usually dour comrade Molotov is smiling.  It was comrade Vladimir Lenin (1870–1924; head of government of Russia or Soviet Union 1917-1924) who dubbed Molotov “stone ass” because of his famous capacity (rare among the Bolsheviks) to sit for hours at his desk and process the flow of paperwork the CPSU’s bureaucracy generated.  Precise in every way, Molotov would correct those who suggested Lenin’s moniker had been “iron ass” but, disapproving of “shameful bureaucratism”, he may have used several variants in the same vein and in another nod to Molotov’s centrality in the administrative machinery of government, he was known also as “comrade paper-clip”.

On paper, between 1936-1991, the Supreme Soviet was the highest institution of state authority in the Soviet Union (1922-1991) but was in reality a “rubber stamp parliament” which existed only to ratify, adding a veneer of legality to laws sent down by the executive, controlled exclusively by the CPSU although it was valued for photo-opportunities, enthralled delegates always seen attentively listening to comrade Stalin’s speeches.  On election night comrade Stalin was quoted in the Soviet press as saying: “Never in the history of the world have there been such really free and really democratic elections -- never!  History knows no other example like it...our universal elections will be carried out as the freest elections and the most democratic compared with elections in any other country in the world.  Universal elections exist and are also held in some capitalist countries, so-called democratic countries.  But in what atmosphere are elections held there?… In an atmosphere of class conflicts, in an atmosphere of class enmity.”  The statement often attributed to comrade Stalin: “It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes” probably was apocryphal but indicative of how he did things and his psephological model has been an inspiration to figures such as Saddam Hussein (1937–2006; president of Iraq 1979-2003) and Kim Jong-Un (Kim III, b 1982; Supreme Leader of DPRK (North Korea) since 2011).

Mr Putin’s (Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; b 1952; president or prime minister of Russia since 1999) use of referendums as an attempt to add a legal gloss to Moscow’s annexation of parts of the Ukraine are an example of the way dictators often are most concerned with the appearance of lawfulness in what they do.  As a general principle, for an annexation to be valid under international law it requires (1) that the borders be exactly defined, (2) that the nation asserting control be capable of defending the territory, (3) that the population is substantially in accord with the change and (4) that recognition is granted by the international community (these days through the mechanism of the United Nations (UN)).  Given the military situation on the ground, it seems unlikely any of these pre-conditions had been met at the time Mr Putin conducted his triumphal ceremonies in the Kremlin.  The substantial majorities reported as being in favor of annexation in referendums conducted in September 2022 were an echo of the result of the 2014 Crimean status referendum which (according to the Kremlin) validated the earlier Russian occupation.

In this, Moscow’s referendums were to some extent similar to the infamous referendum conducted by the Nazis in 1938 to validate the Anschluss (joining) with Germany.  Although the reported result had some 99% voting in favor, it was not a vote which could be considered in any way free or fair although it may be a majority might have been achieved, based on the response of the population when the occupation was executed.  In some ways, the exaggeration of the yes vote by the Nazis worked to Austria’s long-term advantage, the improbability of the published result allowing the creation of the post-war narrative of Austria as the first of the Nazi’s victims rather than a nation which welcomed the incorporation.  The voting papers were headed Referendum and Greater German Parliament and the question was: Do you agree with the reunification of Austria with the German Reich that took place on 13 March 1938 and do you vote for the list of our Leader Adolf Hitler?  The choice was Yes or No.

When the political cartoonist David Low (1891-1963) drew his take on the Anschluss referendum, he called it a plebiscite, and included the Duce and Western democracies as complicit.

Much has changed since 1945 but the recommendations for the best way for the West to handle the Kremlin today are exactly the same as those included in a paper called Facts and Tendencies in Wartime, 1944, written by Ronald Matthews (1904-1963), while Moscow correspondent (1942-1944) for the Daily Herald :

"It is of absolutely paramount importance that the Western powers should be able to give Russia at the end of the war... a sense of security.  Though I think it is just as important from all points of view that they should be able to do so without making concessions to her which they feel to be unjustified.  Such concessions would make only for further rankling ill-feeling; nor do I think the Russians will ever really trust us till we show firmness as well as conciliation in our dealings with them.  I may be wrong but I cannot help feeling that the effects of our giving in to them on points on which we feel we are right is doubly unfortunate.  First, it loses us their respect (the Russians respect and respond to tough bargaining).  And, secondly, it may well give them not confidence in us, but a sense that we are temporarily buying them off, just as the Germans and they bought each other off in August 1939 (the Nazi-Soviet Pact)".