The time bomb Claus
von Stauffenberg alias Tom Cruise carries in
Valkyrie: the movie, is made with components provided for by the British,
whereby the July 20 plotters hoped for a never confirmed, peace deal with
England.
Of
course from a historical point of view, there were initiatives in many branches
of government aimed at negotiating an Anglo-German peace accord. Andrew Roberts
might have a point with his amusing observation, "There were so many
amateur and professional contacts between the protagonists in the various
neutral countries that one is left with the impression that it must have been
hard to get to the bar in any Swiss cafe during the Phoney
War for all the spies discussing peace terms with one another.”1
But
aristocrats where certainly among them, and not only to try and secure a peace
deal with England. On 27 November 1940, there was a meeting in San Francisco
between two men and a woman: the person who joined Stephanie von Hohenlohe and
Fritz Wiedemann for 'peace talks' was Sir William Wiseman, former head of the
British Secret Service in the western hemisphere. Stephanie genuinely saw
herself as the woman who wanted to stop the war and who could have been a peace
broker, and that the war would be over by the beginning of 1941. Her son Prince
Franz even published an essay to this effect, entitled “The Woman who Almost
Stopped the War.” The question also arose as to who in Germany would back such
a peace plan. The first name to be mentioned was that of Crown Prince Wilhelm,
who later would refuse cooperation with “Valkyrie,” that entailed killing
Hitler in 1944. Stephanie also mentioned the Gestapo and SS chief, Heinrich
Himmler, as a possible ally, on the grounds that he was a “royalist.”2
Thanks
to her remarkable gifts for networking and negotiation, Stephanie who in fact
obtained her title trough her marriage, was employed as a society columnist by
Lord Rothermere. She gained access to the German
Reich Chancellery in Berlin and got to know Adolf Hitler personally.
Conveniently overlooking her Jewish origins, Hitler began to employ her on
secret diplomatic missions. She reached the peak of her success when Hitler
awarded her the Golden Insignia of the Nazi Party and gave her a castle in
Austria. By this time Hitler's adjutant, Fritz Wiedemann, had been her lover
for several years. However, when this liaison was discovered by the Fuhrer,
Wiedemann was dispatched to the USA in a junior diplomatic post, and Stephanie
followed him.
During
their conversation, Wiedemann trustingly informed Sir William that the German
embassy in Washington and all official German establishments in the USA had
received instructions from Berlin not to do anything that might mobilize
American public opinion against Hitler and the Third Reich. On 13 January 1941
President Franklin D. Roosevelt received a 30-page summary of the meeting of
the 'peace envoys' in California. Hoover's summary includes this account of the
princess's contribution to the discussion:
The
Princess stated that she had not seen Hitler since January 1939. Wiseman then
suggested that Hitler might think she was going to Germany on behalf of the
British. In reply to this remark, the Princess stated she would have to take
that chance but that Hitler was genuinely fond of her and that he would look
forward to her coming, and she thought Hitler would listen to her. When asked
by Wiseman just what she would say to Hitler, she replied, 'I must say more than
"war is terrible and must stop",' She stated she would make Hitler
see that he was 'butting against a stone wall' and make him believe that at the
opportune moment he must align himself with Britain and that such an alliance
would bring a lasting peace.
The
Princess stated that she would set forth three powerful arguments: First that
Hitler had failed to conquer Britain [two months earlier the RAF had beaten off
the German Luftwaffe, and Hitler's plans to invade Britain were postponed
indefinitely.]; secondly that the alliance with Russia [i.e. since the
Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of August 1939.] and Italy was of little
importance compared to an alliance with Britain which would bring about a
lasting peace. She stated also that 'Mussolini is a clown, the laughing-stock
of the whole American nation'. [ ... ] She continued that the third point in
her discussion with Hitler would be to point out the strength of the American
nation and that “anybody that told Hitler that the German Reich was stronger than
the United States, was telling damn lies.”3
Forthcoming
as she was, Stephanie however also pointed out to her colleagues that President
Roosevelt was already technically in breach of US neutrality by sending fifty
destroyers to Britain at America's expense. Hence it didn’t come as a surprise
that Roosevelt himself did not think much of the endeavors of Wiedemann and
Princess Stephanie, it was already too late.
Interesting,
Stephanie also belonged to the exclusive Cliveden Set. This informal grouping
took its name from the Thames-side country house, Cliveden, near Maidenhead.
owned by Lord and Lady Astor. Lady Astor (1879-1964) was born Nancy Witcher
Langhorne and brought up in Virginia, one of the five exceptionally
good-looking Langhorne sisters.
The Cliveden
Set was a group of people sympathetic to Germany, who advocated a policy of
appeasement towards the Nazi regime. It existed alongside two other informal
pro-German associations in London: the Link, and the Anglo-German Fellowship.
Together they formed the basis for National Socialist infiltration of Britain,
both on the political and the propaganda level. The Link received financial
support from Berlin; it and the Anglo-German Fellowship were also backed by
Lord Rothermere and his son Esmond. So it is no
surprise that Princess Stephanie was made an honorary member of the
Anglo-German Fellowship. Her most important and influential friends in this
association were Lord Elibank and Lord Sempil It was through these two members of the House of
Lords that the princess was kept constantly informed about shifts in policy and
sentiment within the British government.4
In
London there were other hostesses who played a high-profile role in the three
pro-German circles already mentioned. One was Lady Londonderry, wife of the
Marquess of Londonderry, holder since 1935 the office of Lord Privy Seal, and
another was Lady (Emerald) Cunard, another American-born Englishwoman. Lady
Cunard, the widow of Sir Bache Cunard, maintained a literary and musical salon
and was known as 'the Queen of Covent Garden'. In 1935 she was full of
enthusiasm not only for Hitler but also for Ambassador Ribbentrop, and it was
said that she, through Wallis Simpson, influenced the Prince of Wales to favor
Germany. It was at the instigation of Lady Cunard that the conductor, Sir
Thomas Beecham, gave a concert in the Berlin Philharmonic Hall, which Hitler
himself attended. In 1936 Lord and Lady Londonderry visited Hitler together; in
February 1937 she described Hitler as the symbol of the new Germany, as its
creator and a born leader, a captivating personality and a man who possessed
the greatness 'to act in a perfectly normal way'. She was convinced that he was
a guarantor of peace and of friendship with the British. He had preserved
Germany from communism and he alone “could be relied upon to save Europe.”5
The term
"Cliveden Set", which was later bandied about by influential
journalists, was an exaggeration, a most ominous example is the at the time
popular in the USA “None Dare Call It Conspiracy” by Gary Allen. The Cliveden
Set as Norman Rose details, however simple consisted of a number of leading
British figures, who enjoyed Nancy Astor's hospitality over long and
interesting weekends.
As
another example of conspiracy theory mongering in 1962 an early member of the
Cliveden Set, Lord Robert Henry Brand, was consulted by Carroll Quigley an
American professor of History at Georgetown University about a piece of
research he was doing. Later published in “Tragedy and Hope” told of a 'secret society' founded by Cecil Rhodes
and 'his principal trustee', Milner. Devoted to the preservation and expansion
of the British Empire, it still functioned. Known variously as Milner's
Kindergarten, or the Round Table group, or the Cliveden Set, they met
“secretly” at All Souls, Blickling and Cliveden.
Among its leaders he named Lothian and Brand. Quigley crowed that he had
revealed “one of the most important historical facts of the twentieth century”,
for this group had been “the unknown force guiding Chamberlain's government”,
the “hidden factor” responsible for its policy. Brand however had no time for
this kind of nonsense if “Astounded” at Quigley's conclusions, Brand dismissed
his conjectures as “absolute moonshine” and “entirely without foundation.”
Summing up, he told Quigley: “Your ideas on this subject are a mare's nest
based on an illusion.”6
Not
meaning the group around Nancy Astor but general concept of
British society as a whole, outlined in a paper by the German foreign
ministry was that of a pyramid in which the upper class played a vital
political role and consequently seemed to be a much more important player than
its dethroned German counterpart.7
Thus as
we have seen so far, the interwar years seem to have given some nobles brief
political opportunities-in Germany for those surrounding Hindenburg, in Hungary
those following Horthy, in Spain those collaborating with Franco, and as we
have started to see also, be it to a lesser degree-in England. This would
indicate that in countries in which fascist or authoritarian regimes were
successful the aristocracy experienced a last hurrah. Yet what part did they
really play in such movements? Are we perhaps falling for a left-wing
conspiracy theory by overestimating the nobility's political prowess and
underestimating the degree to which they often stood as a conservative bulwark
against the radical right? Measuring the explanatory variable, let us therefore
first continue by taking a closer look at England, and next test our thesis in
P.3 on two additional examples, France and Rumania.9
As with
fascism agreement on a common definition is difficult to find, we will not
claim any false precision. What was not meant however in the case of Germany in
P.1, is the concept of a “conservative revolution”, a phrase
particularly popular in the older historiography of the subject in Germany.
Generally speaking, as we have seen, the radical right was composed of groups
that existed in small numbers on the political margins of Europe before the
First World War, but became increasingly powerful in the interwar years. There
were affinities and coalitions between conservatives and the radical right.
Disgruntled former Tories in Britain, for example, were as much fascinated by
authoritarian and later fascist regimes as Prussian conservatives who
eventually turned to Hitler.10
Nobles
were suddenly confronted with republics, revolutions, and an influx of
'Bolshevist' ideas. The Red threat varied from country to country, of course;
but the international network of the European aristocracy tried to turn it into
a common experience-a class war seemed to be imminent. How, if at all, did they
as a result become a focus for anti-democratic tendencies? Or, to quote Dominic
Lieven's last sentences in The Aristocracy in Europe 1815-1914: In extremis,
would aristocrats be sufficiently reactionary or civilized to remain
constrained by traditional conceptions of religion and honor, or would
insecurity, resentment of lost status and agnosticism lead them down the path
towards totalitarian nationalism and its inevitable companion, barbaric
anti-Semitism?11 In fact debates about a new order (preferably based on
the old one) in which aristocrats would play a leading role took place in all
European countries after 1918.
England
According
to the Duchess of Westminster the aristocracy led rather a schizophrenic life:
The dark shadows were caused by labor problems, strikes and unemployment. From
time to time I wrote cheerfully in my diary that we seemed to be on the brink
of a bloody revolution, but it was a possibility which had been at the back of
the minds of the upper classes since the days of Marie Antoinette and which
they had got quite used to, so in the next sentence I went on to describe how I
was trimming a hat or arranging a dinner party.12
In
England furthermore, as we have started to see, German aristocrats were, useful
in doing the proselytizing. Aristocrats preferred talking to aristocrats, and
access to each other was easily gained, even if there was no family connection.
The aforementioned international communication within the aristocracy worked
again: German aristocrats passed on their positive experiences with the new
regime to their English cousins in order to give Hitler more credibility
abroad. British aristocrats and the royal family were bombarded with glowing
reports about the Third Reich. Some of the delivery boys were well chosen. By
recruiting for example the Duke of Coburg, the Nazis gained a direct channel to
the British peerage and monarchy. For Coburg, the Nazis offered the chance to
play a political role once again: “but what pleases me most is that they still
need our help. In spite of their saying nowadays that the young must rule.”13
Coburg
had strong personal reasons to hate the Communists. His sister-in-law Victoria
was married to Grand Duke Cyril and used Coburg as a base to further her
husband's candidature as the only legitimate tsar in exile. This brought her
into contact with the German extreme right, first Ludendorff, then Hitler, who
in 1922 celebrated the infamous German Day in Coburg.14 'Charlie' Coburg
wholeheartedly supported his Russian relatives and their new German friends,
and tried to export this crusade to England. His correspondence with his
sister, the Countess of Athlone, extracts of which have been made available by
the Royal Archives in Windsor, indicates that in the 1930s he used her house as
a base for propaganda talks, and later reported to Berlin on their outcome.15
British
country houses must have been busy places in the 1930s, the last heyday of
country house politics. Coburg was only one of many go-betweens. Goering even
cultivated a ménage of aristocrats with international contacts, including Stephanies first husband Max Hohenlohe (who had excellent
contacts and worked for Goering in Czechoslovakia, Spain, and Switzerland) and
the Wieds family. The aristocratic grandeur of
Goering, a self-styled renaissance man, who invited his British guests to
hunting parties and entertained like Louis XIV, as Chips Channon noted, seemed
familiar and appealing to international members of the aristocracy. British
aristocrats, true 'choreographers' themselves, were full of admiration for the
pomp of fascist movements. 16
Nor was
the idea of charismatic leadership remotely alien to the British aristocracy
they regarded themselves as the bearers of ‘inherited glory'. And referring to
the Duchess of Malfi wrote, “The cinema star had not
yet eclipsed the duchess,” as the Duchess of Westminster put it.17 Furthermore
the Nazi policy of anti-Semitism did not prove to be an obstacle to liking the
regime. Lord Redesdale and Churchill had admired
Houston Stewart Chamberlain's Foundations if the Nineteenth Century, and the
aristocratic discourse about racially pure elites was as strong in Britain as
in Germany (although in Britain this was mainly connected with the Empire).18
After
the First World War anti-Semitic conspiracy theories thrived among all classes
and aristocrats were in the lead. Their anti-Semitism ranged from the 'mild'
forms used within the Cecil family to obsessive outbursts such as those of the
Duke of Northumberland at the far end of the spectrum, who believed in a Jewish
Bolshevik conspiracy. Richard A. Grosvenor, 2nd Duke of Westminster, even
consulted a book entitled Jews Who's Who, which gave an exact breakdown of how
much Jewish blood was flowing in English aristocratic veins.19 Such issues also
worried the organo-fascists who have been analysed by
Dan Stone. This group, in some ways similar to the German Blut
und Boden ideologues, were known as the English Mistery,
and believed in an 'organic society, a holistic, unitary, racially pure
body in the sense of being rooted in the soil, and led by a hereditary
landed aristocracy that instinctively performed its leadership role'. 20 Its
members included anti-Semites as well as reactionary conservatives such as
Anthony Ludovici and Viscount Lymington. The latter
eventually left the Mistery and founded the English
Array, which was pro-German.21
The
papers of the German foreign ministry show that the Nazi regime placed great
hopes in this movement. One reason was that lesser British royals had
connections with the Mistery and English Array,
another was that it held out the promise of becoming an opposition movement:
“this group is extremely anti-parliamentarian. It includes people from the
politically interested upper classes, among them numerous members of the House
of Lords.”22
The
above points show that during the interwar period aristocrats were for a number
of reasons attracted to fascist ideas. But ultimately the British aristocracy
had more to gain by conformity. In the House of Lords debate of 1934 on the
British Union of Fascists, the higher ranks of the nobility fought amongst
themselves as to which interpretation was correct. After the aforementioned
Earl of Kinnoull had accused his fellow peers of
helping to finance fascist movements in Britain, Viscount Esher
responded that if the choice had to be made between Stafford Cripps and Oswald
Mosley, it would have to be Mosley: There are innumerable quiet people in this
country, who hating both those gentlemen, will, if they are forced to choose
between them, I am glad to say, choose Sir Oswald Mosley.23
Viscount
Cecil of Chelwood, who was later to become
Londonderry's formidable opponent, considered this response dangerously
nonchalant. He reminded the House that radical parties which believed they
could come to power by force were a danger to the constitution. This House of
Lords debate, with its three aristocratic archetypes ranging from the far left
to the far right, shows how important this institution, written off by many as
irrelevant, was for upholding aristocratic decorum. It played a crucial role in
enabling fellow peers to exert social control over radical aristocrats. Its
traditional political language and social code did not allow aggressive
confrontations.
In
Germany after long overdue reform debates, the first chambers and the Prussian
Upper House disappeared in 1918, and soon afterwards the radical Deutsche Adelsgenossenschaft (DAG) usurped their position, forcing
conformity on the German aristocracy. Britain had more political pluralism
within the aristocracy than did Germany. 'Red' aristocrats, the Duchess of Atholl being the most prominent example, had always caught
the limelight. Others were fairly apolitical, such as Nancy Mitford, Mosley's
sister-in-law, who enjoyed making fun of him and her Hitler-obsessed sister
Unity in Wigs on the Green. The Mitfords were the
most famous, but not the only, aristocratic family divided by politics.
Institutional
ties with the government are, ultimately, what prevented the British
aristocracy from following the same path as their German cousins. Aristocrats
often had younger sons or sons-in-law in the 'House of Pretence'
(that is, the House of Commons), unpopular though it might be, and this meant
that for the sake of their careers they had to give due consideration to
political and social issues. Furthermore, solidarity with the losers, for
example, the impoverished Anglo-Irish aristocracy, was over by the 1930s. They
were eventually written off, many ending their lives in genteel Irish poverty
or in lodging houses on the south coast.24
Another reason
why radical ideas were held in check amongst the English aristocracy was that
this group, unlike their German counterparts, had various lines of retreat.
After losing formal and institutional status in 1918 the German aristocracy
continued to focus on the land, and did not try to find new career
opportunities. The English aristocracy, on the other hand, had more than one
iron in the fire. They had never been totally dependent on life in the
country-indeed, it was precisely their investment in urban centers, industry,
and the Empire that had made them strong. Their relationship with country life
was characterized by a mixture of pragmatism and mysticism. But despite any
sentimental attachments, they took less and less responsibility for countryside
affairs, for instance, in church matters.25
Because
the British aristocracy had always worked at many levels as a local, national,
and imperial elite, the Empire was an ideal safe haven in a crisis. It enabled
the English aristocracy to create a flourishing parallel universe, an
aristocratic Disneyland full of replica country houses and urban palaces. Many
aristocrats, such as the Marquis of Graham (later 7th Duke of Montrose) or Lord
William Scott (son of the Duke of Buccleuch), moved to the White Highlands of
Kenya and Rhodesia, and created a feudal lifestyle. Viscount Lymington was to join them in 1947, deeply disappointed by
post-war England.26
He
should have counted himself lucky not to have been interned under Regulation
18B. A recently published MI-5 file shows that another ardent fascist, Viscountess Downe, was not
interned because “if too many titled people are arrested the public might get
the wrong idea as to the importance of the Fifth Column in this
country.”27 Many illustrious Hitler admirers-among them Tavistock, Buccleuch, Westminster, Brocket, Mar, and Queenborough-escaped prison. It could hardly be seen as
surprising that the establishment was covering up for its own people. Halifax,
for example, forwarded pro-Nazi correspondence he received from the public to
Special Branch, On the outbreak of war every aristocrat did his duty. For some
this meant a schizophrenic lifestyle. The Marquis of Graham served on
destroyers in the Mediterranean, but whenever he and his brother had time they
were involved in pro-peace activities and secret meetings with the Duke of
Westminster.28 This group did not give up its ideologies overnight.
1 Andrew
Roberts, The Holy Fox. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1991,182.
2.
Martha Schad, Hitler's Spy Princess: The Extraordinary
Lifeof Princess Stephanie von Hohenlohe, 2004, 136.
3. Idem,
Schad, 136-37.
4. For a
detailed description see Norman Rose, The Cliveden Set: Portrait of an
Exclusive Fraternity, 2000.
5. See
Ian Kershaw, Making Friends With Hitler: Lord Londonderry, the Nazis, and the
Road to War II, 2004.
6. Rose,
The Cliveden Set, p. 212
7.
Report by Herr von Korostovetz, a former Russian
diplomat who worked for the Nazi reglme. Auswartiges Amt Archiv Berlin,
Pol. 2977175.
8. See
in particular Martin Blinkhorn (ed.), Fascists and
Conservatives: The Radical Right and the Establishment in Twentieth-Century
Europe, London, 1990.
9. Using
different material, a similar comparison was initially started by Walter Demel, in ; Der Europaische Adel vor der Revolution: Sieben Thesen,
in Ronald G. Asch (ed.), Der europaische Adel im Ancien Regime: Van der Krise der staendischen Monarchien bis zur Revolution
(1600-1789) Cologne, 2001, 420.
10.
Martin Blinkhorn (ed.), Fascists and Conseroatives: The Radical Right and the Establishment in
Twentieth-Century Europe (London, 1990).
11.
Lieven, Aristocracy in Europe, London, 1992,242.
12. Loelia, Duchess of Westminster, Grace and Favour: The Memoirs of Loelia,
Duchess if Westminster, London, 1961,123.
13.Duke
of Coburg to his sister, Alice, Countess of Athlone, 2 Mar. 1939, AV/FF 31
Athlone, Royal Archives, Windsor.
14.
Stalin was paranoid about the emigres. The Cheka even invented a front group,
the Trust, which fooled monarchists. It became a source of misinformation for
monarchist groups about events in Russia and aristocrats also invested in it
financially. See Andrew Barros, 'A Window on the "Trust": The Case of
Ado Birk', Intelligence and National Security, 10/2
(April 1995), 275.
15.
Thank you letter from Charles, Duke of Saxe Coburg, to Alice, Countess of
Athlone, 15. Apr. 1936, AV/FF 3/ ACA/10, Royal Archives, Windsor.
16. Earl
of Portsmouth, A Knot if Roots, London,1965, 49.
17. Loelia, Duchess of Westminster, Grace and Favour.
18. Karina Urbach and Bernd Buchner, Der Briefwechsel zwischen
Houston Stewart Chamberlain und Prinz Max von Baden (1909-1919), Vierteljahrshäfte fuer
Zeitgeschichte, 52/1, January 200), 121-77.
19.
According to the Duke of Westminster, the Jews themselves, not liking to be
revealed in their true colours, had tried to suppress
this interesting publication and his copy was the only one that had escaped
some great holocaust.' Loelia, Duchess of
Westminster, Grace and Favour, 189.
20. Dan
Stone, Responses to Nazism in Britain,1933-1939, London, 2003, 165.
21. See
Richard Moore-Colyer, 'Towards "Mother
Earth": Jorian Jenks, Organicism, the Right and
the British Union of Fascists', Journal of Contemporary History, 39/3, July
2004, 354; Jorian E. F. Jenks was the agricultural
expert for the radical right. He fought for the impoverished landed aristocracy
that had been ousted by an 'alien plutocracy'. According to Jenks the
aristocracy should stay in charge: The aristocratic principle of respect for
the past, careful husbandry of the present and stewardship for the future was
pivotal to the organicist credo and, by implication demanded a stable society
susceptible to sympathetic, yet firm, authority. Ibid. 366.
22. Bericht iiber politische Erneuerungbestrebungen im Sinne autoritarer
Staatsführung, Pol. 29 77175. 2 May
1934, Auswartiges Amt Archiv,
Berlin.
23. ”Fascist
Organisation in this country”, Parliamentary Debates,
Fifth Ser. xc, House of Lords, Session 1933-4, p. 1013.
24. David
Cannadine, Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy,London, 1992, 699.
25. For
this see Peter Mandler, The Fall and Rise of the
Stately Home (London, 1997) and Alun Howkins, The
Death of Rural England: A Social History of the Countryside since 1900, London,
2003, 21-2.
26. Martin
Pugh, Hurrah for the Blackshirts! Faschist
And Fascism in Britiain Between the Wars, 2005, 82.
27. PRO
KV 2/2146, National Archives, Kew. However the viscountess
wanted to go to prison. Her lawyer even planned a 'question being put to the
Home Secretary as to why you have not been detained while certain working class
members in your constituency have'. Ibid.
28. For
this see Pugh, 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts', 307.
For updates
click homepage here