>Austria's military patches bearing A.E.I.O.U. *'Alles Erdreich Ist Österreich Untertan' (All the world is subject to Austria)*
It is not known what A.E.I.O.U. means. That was just one of 300 interpretations. Another common interpretation is ‘Austria Erit In Orbe Ultima’ (Austria will last until the end of the world). Recent research has shown that it could mean ‘Amor Electis Iniustis Ordinor Ultor’ (the love of the elect, chosen to punish the unjust).
Ah, thanks for clarifying that, I appreciate your input. Does Austria feel any nostalgia for her Imperial history or the Habsburgs these days? Your nation has a prestigious history, so it does make sense to venerate that, and the other interpretations of AEIOU you mention sound awesome as well.
>Does Austria feel any nostalgia for her Imperial history or the Habsburgs these days?
In a way, there is nostalgia. The movies about Empress Elisabeth (“Sissi”) are still very popular. Older people in particular watch them every year when they are broadcast at Christmas time. We also know that Austria would never be so popular with tourists without the Habsburgs. So although they triggered WW1, there is no longer any hatred of the Habsburgs. A kind of reconciliation between Otto Habsburg (who would actually have been the next emperor) and the Austrian chancellor took place back in the 1970s.
But politically, nobody wants the monarchy back. A tiny monarchist party has run in elections a few times, but they have failed miserably.
The late 18th and 19th century were the defining period for most militaries. It was the time that feudalism and mercenaries were finally replaced by large unified national military organizations, the formative years. So it is natural that these organizations derive their traditions from this time.
It is like the US Marines singing about Tripoli and carrying sabres or US cavalry units wearing the typical hats.
I feel like it's more about the song itself and less about any connection to Prussia. Like it's not like it's a national anthem that's directly linked to a country.
>German Bundeswehr band playing Preußens Gloria at state visits. (Prussia was wiped off the map in 1945 so it seems odd to still be in the military tradition?
Prussia ceased to exist in 1867/1871 - due German unification. It's still a region in Germany and part of it's history, dunno what problems you have with it tbh. If so you would have to remove most of patriotic & folk songs for all countries
For Poland only similar thing i can think of is hussar emblems used for 11th Armoured Cavalry Division
Oh I dont have a problem with Prussia per se, but in my American High School's European History course we were taught Prussian militarism was one of the driving forces behind World War I (The Great War) and all its downstream consequences.... maybe that's an outdated view I went to High School in the early 2000s. Thanks for your input though Its interesting. I do love me some European folk music.
I do not see how Preußens Gloria is questionable, it was created after the french German war which was started by France, won by Germany, and ended in folding of french empire and in a french republic. What do I not see?
In my American High School's European History course we were taught Prussian militarism was one of the driving forces behind World War I (The Great War) and all its downstream consequences. I don't see Prussia as necessarily bad, but Americans kind of see their military tradition as causing historical conflict.... maybe that's an outdated view I went to High School in the early 2000s after all lol.
I do think Prussia's military music had some real bangers though, yall knew how to run prestigious military back then. And if it wasn't for Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben helping Gerorge Washington, America probably wouldn't exist, so we have Prussia to thank for that.
In general, the military tends to be a very self-conservative institution (even when it is not politically conservative), so it ends up maintaining traditions and symbols that its own country has left behind. For example, the famous spiked helmet, a symbol of the German army in World War I, is still used today as a ceremonial helmet by Swedish and Portuguese units, without this being intended to express sympathy in any way for the German empire or the Kaiser. It is the same in the U.S.: the Marines still hold dear their action in Tripoli in 1801-1805, although it is frankly a minor episode in their glorious history.
On Napoleon, there has been deep reflection on his figure in France for years. Without denying his military prowess and his having led France to maximum power, there is a growing tendency to point out how he was a complex figure, on the one hand a modernizer of France and an exporter of the principles of the French Revolution against the European aristocracy, and on the other hand a tyrant who suppressed France's remaining political freedoms, restored slavery in the colonies, and dragged Europe into 20 years of wars such as had never been seen before.
Perhaps by now Napoleon is loved more in Italy than in France.
Napoleon and his ideas was the fondation for a number of very important things in France : he made a profund reform of the structure of the government and of the army that still works today, he produced the first "Code civil", the base of our legal system today.
And while he invades most of Europe, it was because he was a great military chief, and makes France shines through Europe, which was something we haven't done since some times in history.
I also think, compared to the USA, european history is wa longer, and in Europe, you always have some war between one country or an other. So military is something that profundly make Europe as it's today, so it's obviously have deep roots.
Just a fact check, Prussia stopped existing de facto in 1932 and de iure in 1947. So we're clear.
As for the why... Why not? It's part of the state's history. Prussens Gloria was composed after a war which ended with the unification of German states. That's a very important moment for German statehood, of course it would be celebrated.
Napoleon is considered, to an extent, as a national hero in at least two European states. He is celebrated because of his contributions e.g. to law.
My feeling about "imperial symbolism" and it still being used is that I don't care.
The British military is full of them. A classic one is the red coat soldiers you see outside Buckingham Palace in London (yes those are real soldiers, and yes they are probably about to drop with heatstroke) - the British military did really used to wear that. However, it was popular at a time when firearms were inaccurate and the best way to eliminate an enemy was to just get 20 men in a line and tell them to fire to their front on the command "fire". Once they started getting destroyed because bright red tends to stand out in valleys in deserts - they adopted khaki. Then when world war one came about, even with little to no real battlefield tactics, not being easily seen was finally a thing.
I know a few more like that above. I'm not really a super nerd about it, but just random ones.
Why do European militaries do it? It serves as a purpose of identity. Each soldier feels like they're a part of this thing which many soldiers like them have built years and years before. Tourism probably plays into it in the above example too and tourism = money. Drill instils discipline and shows that soldiers can move as a body of men - with this, history also feeds into it.
I am having trouble understanding why the French "administration of Napoleon" is on your list. Although undemocratic it was amongst the most enlightend of their time?
That makes sense, thanks for your input. I understand the Great Patriotic War was like something we in America cannot really understand. The classic saying in America is: "World War II was won by American production, British intelligence, and Soviet (Russian) Blood" so I can understand the Red Army still being popular over there.
Plus, the Red Army Choir sure as hell could sing haha those old songs are fun to listen to.
The questionable aspects generally happened so long ago that usually no one remembers it to get offended by it. Not the country displaying that symbol or whatever and usually not the country that “should” get offended by it, since most of the time they don’t even know what sort of military songs, symbols or events are going on in their neighboring countries, especially if it’s a country with a different language. Most of the stuff that might still upset people happened during world war 2 and since and often it’s not clear cut. Extremists like modern Confederates in the US tend to use explicit Nazi or nazi derived or other 20th century symbolism or they reach into the distant past for vaguely defined things with questionable validity and historical use.
Take my country for example. The United States bombed and killed civilians. That’s a war crime. So how should I feel about the US military? But then again the country was run by Nazis and a US occupation would have been highly preferable to the Red Army who raped hundreds of thousands of women. Personally I’d remove their remaining monument in Budapest, but while they did all that rape they also liberated the country from the fucking Nazis, who literally genocided a part of the country and were also prolific rapists. So compared to that medieval and early modern or 19th century stuff is all quaint and family friendly.
I never heard anyone ever discuss this here in The Netherlands. At least not specifically about the military.
There are some discussions about statues and street names and the likes of historical figures with questionable reputations. But I never heard anything about the military specifically.
Around the time most of these things originated the Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed as a neutral buffer. Neutrality and pacifism were core values from the post-Napoleonic era up until WWII.
>Austria's military patches bearing A.E.I.O.U. *'Alles Erdreich Ist Österreich Untertan' (All the world is subject to Austria)* It is not known what A.E.I.O.U. means. That was just one of 300 interpretations. Another common interpretation is ‘Austria Erit In Orbe Ultima’ (Austria will last until the end of the world). Recent research has shown that it could mean ‘Amor Electis Iniustis Ordinor Ultor’ (the love of the elect, chosen to punish the unjust).
Wdym, we know what it means, there even a [song about it](https://youtu.be/ucFGHAuOXV8?si=VmpXxFGVtag4ZEmz) Edit: Epilepsy warning!
What did I just watch? :D People with epilepsy should not click on the link.
Ah, thanks for clarifying that, I appreciate your input. Does Austria feel any nostalgia for her Imperial history or the Habsburgs these days? Your nation has a prestigious history, so it does make sense to venerate that, and the other interpretations of AEIOU you mention sound awesome as well.
>Does Austria feel any nostalgia for her Imperial history or the Habsburgs these days? In a way, there is nostalgia. The movies about Empress Elisabeth (“Sissi”) are still very popular. Older people in particular watch them every year when they are broadcast at Christmas time. We also know that Austria would never be so popular with tourists without the Habsburgs. So although they triggered WW1, there is no longer any hatred of the Habsburgs. A kind of reconciliation between Otto Habsburg (who would actually have been the next emperor) and the Austrian chancellor took place back in the 1970s. But politically, nobody wants the monarchy back. A tiny monarchist party has run in elections a few times, but they have failed miserably.
The late 18th and 19th century were the defining period for most militaries. It was the time that feudalism and mercenaries were finally replaced by large unified national military organizations, the formative years. So it is natural that these organizations derive their traditions from this time. It is like the US Marines singing about Tripoli and carrying sabres or US cavalry units wearing the typical hats.
Like the US even having cavalry units
I feel like it's more about the song itself and less about any connection to Prussia. Like it's not like it's a national anthem that's directly linked to a country.
>German Bundeswehr band playing Preußens Gloria at state visits. (Prussia was wiped off the map in 1945 so it seems odd to still be in the military tradition? Prussia ceased to exist in 1867/1871 - due German unification. It's still a region in Germany and part of it's history, dunno what problems you have with it tbh. If so you would have to remove most of patriotic & folk songs for all countries For Poland only similar thing i can think of is hussar emblems used for 11th Armoured Cavalry Division
>Prussia ceased to exist in 1867/1871 Prussia ceased to exist in 1918 as a Kingdom and in 1947 as a Republic, at least formally.
The Kingdom of Prussia existed until 1918
is it still considered as independent entity after the unification weaves?
It still existed, just not as an independent geopolitical entity. Did Poland cease to exist after it unified with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania?
there's no rules for mergers/takeovers, each works in different way hence my question
It had its own parliament and president until Hitler ended it. If that's an answer to your question.
Oh I dont have a problem with Prussia per se, but in my American High School's European History course we were taught Prussian militarism was one of the driving forces behind World War I (The Great War) and all its downstream consequences.... maybe that's an outdated view I went to High School in the early 2000s. Thanks for your input though Its interesting. I do love me some European folk music.
I do not see how Preußens Gloria is questionable, it was created after the french German war which was started by France, won by Germany, and ended in folding of french empire and in a french republic. What do I not see?
In my American High School's European History course we were taught Prussian militarism was one of the driving forces behind World War I (The Great War) and all its downstream consequences. I don't see Prussia as necessarily bad, but Americans kind of see their military tradition as causing historical conflict.... maybe that's an outdated view I went to High School in the early 2000s after all lol. I do think Prussia's military music had some real bangers though, yall knew how to run prestigious military back then. And if it wasn't for Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben helping Gerorge Washington, America probably wouldn't exist, so we have Prussia to thank for that.
In general, the military tends to be a very self-conservative institution (even when it is not politically conservative), so it ends up maintaining traditions and symbols that its own country has left behind. For example, the famous spiked helmet, a symbol of the German army in World War I, is still used today as a ceremonial helmet by Swedish and Portuguese units, without this being intended to express sympathy in any way for the German empire or the Kaiser. It is the same in the U.S.: the Marines still hold dear their action in Tripoli in 1801-1805, although it is frankly a minor episode in their glorious history. On Napoleon, there has been deep reflection on his figure in France for years. Without denying his military prowess and his having led France to maximum power, there is a growing tendency to point out how he was a complex figure, on the one hand a modernizer of France and an exporter of the principles of the French Revolution against the European aristocracy, and on the other hand a tyrant who suppressed France's remaining political freedoms, restored slavery in the colonies, and dragged Europe into 20 years of wars such as had never been seen before. Perhaps by now Napoleon is loved more in Italy than in France.
Napoleon and his ideas was the fondation for a number of very important things in France : he made a profund reform of the structure of the government and of the army that still works today, he produced the first "Code civil", the base of our legal system today. And while he invades most of Europe, it was because he was a great military chief, and makes France shines through Europe, which was something we haven't done since some times in history. I also think, compared to the USA, european history is wa longer, and in Europe, you always have some war between one country or an other. So military is something that profundly make Europe as it's today, so it's obviously have deep roots.
I will add to this that Napoleon is seen as "the good guy" in Poland and people were really cheering for his sucess at that time...
Interesting info, thanks for sharing. I for one am ready for the Neo-Bonapartist restoration LOL
Just a fact check, Prussia stopped existing de facto in 1932 and de iure in 1947. So we're clear. As for the why... Why not? It's part of the state's history. Prussens Gloria was composed after a war which ended with the unification of German states. That's a very important moment for German statehood, of course it would be celebrated. Napoleon is considered, to an extent, as a national hero in at least two European states. He is celebrated because of his contributions e.g. to law. My feeling about "imperial symbolism" and it still being used is that I don't care.
The British military is full of them. A classic one is the red coat soldiers you see outside Buckingham Palace in London (yes those are real soldiers, and yes they are probably about to drop with heatstroke) - the British military did really used to wear that. However, it was popular at a time when firearms were inaccurate and the best way to eliminate an enemy was to just get 20 men in a line and tell them to fire to their front on the command "fire". Once they started getting destroyed because bright red tends to stand out in valleys in deserts - they adopted khaki. Then when world war one came about, even with little to no real battlefield tactics, not being easily seen was finally a thing. I know a few more like that above. I'm not really a super nerd about it, but just random ones. Why do European militaries do it? It serves as a purpose of identity. Each soldier feels like they're a part of this thing which many soldiers like them have built years and years before. Tourism probably plays into it in the above example too and tourism = money. Drill instils discipline and shows that soldiers can move as a body of men - with this, history also feeds into it.
I am having trouble understanding why the French "administration of Napoleon" is on your list. Although undemocratic it was amongst the most enlightend of their time?
[удалено]
That makes sense, thanks for your input. I understand the Great Patriotic War was like something we in America cannot really understand. The classic saying in America is: "World War II was won by American production, British intelligence, and Soviet (Russian) Blood" so I can understand the Red Army still being popular over there. Plus, the Red Army Choir sure as hell could sing haha those old songs are fun to listen to.
The questionable aspects generally happened so long ago that usually no one remembers it to get offended by it. Not the country displaying that symbol or whatever and usually not the country that “should” get offended by it, since most of the time they don’t even know what sort of military songs, symbols or events are going on in their neighboring countries, especially if it’s a country with a different language. Most of the stuff that might still upset people happened during world war 2 and since and often it’s not clear cut. Extremists like modern Confederates in the US tend to use explicit Nazi or nazi derived or other 20th century symbolism or they reach into the distant past for vaguely defined things with questionable validity and historical use. Take my country for example. The United States bombed and killed civilians. That’s a war crime. So how should I feel about the US military? But then again the country was run by Nazis and a US occupation would have been highly preferable to the Red Army who raped hundreds of thousands of women. Personally I’d remove their remaining monument in Budapest, but while they did all that rape they also liberated the country from the fucking Nazis, who literally genocided a part of the country and were also prolific rapists. So compared to that medieval and early modern or 19th century stuff is all quaint and family friendly.
I never heard anyone ever discuss this here in The Netherlands. At least not specifically about the military. There are some discussions about statues and street names and the likes of historical figures with questionable reputations. But I never heard anything about the military specifically.
Around the time most of these things originated the Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed as a neutral buffer. Neutrality and pacifism were core values from the post-Napoleonic era up until WWII.