„First the grub, then the morals.“ - This quote by Bertolt Brecht is one that always comes into my head when I read and think about the claims of the Hohenzollerns, namely Georg Friedrich of Prussia, for restitution.

(Caution: Long thread ahead)

First up, I perfectly understand that he has every right to make claims for restitution under German law. I, however, have problems with someone (read: him) filing numerous lawsuits against journalists and publications reporting on their (read: his) claims.

I strongly believe that both individually and collectively we all have to own up to our own and our ancestors’ history. I wrote about this before (see here: https://www.castleholic.com/2019/09/twists-and-turns-of-history-many.html) and I do not believe that you can tie a need bow around historical events so they fit you.

The core question of the dispute between the heir of the Hohenzollern dynasty and several German states is whether his great-grandfather, Crown Prince Wilhelm, significantly aided and abetted the Nazis.

Historians don't agree on this. Most agree that he did play a role but not all of them would classify it as "significantly aiding and abetting".

Georg Friedrich himself once said in an interview, "The Crown Prince sometime strayed from the path but he wasn't a supporter of Hitler. He moved on the right, conservative edge.“

Well, I would like to ask HRH how he defines "supporter" and in what ways you can support a party. Maybe by receiving Hitler in your home as early as 1926? Maybe by protesting against the ban of SA and SS during the early 1930’s?

Maybe by making a deal with Hitler prior to the 1932 presidential elections (that was actually stopped by Kaiser Wilhelm)? Maybe by endorsing Hitler (later claiming that you got them two million votes)?

Maybe by making symbolic gestures like appearing during the Day of Potsdam, by appearing alongside Röhm and Himmler at events, by showing the Hitler salute? Yes, he briefly shifted support to Schleicher but later returned it to Hitler again.

I would also like to ask HRH if he ever looked at the names of the people who made up Hitler’s first government and their party affiliations. I would like to ask him how many, he thinks, of them were just conservatives and not reactionaries and fascists.

It’s not upon me to decide whether the Crown Prince significantly aided and abetted the Nazis (and frankly I don't know). You can all do your own research, make or not make up your own mind. But to say that he did not at least support the Nazis borders on historical revisionism.

There’s a lot of reason to at least question Crown Prince Wilhelm’s role. To do that, we need historians. We need an open discussion both within the scientific community but also by an informed public. That's all part of an opinion building process.

I will be the first to say that there certainly were articles & reports about the matter that included bias. The Prussian Hohenzollern, due to a variety of reasons, do not have the best standing in the opinion of many Germans and that transpires in some reports.

But that’s still no reason to file lawsuits against dozens and dozens of publications and journalists who report on the case to try to sway public opinion. In my opinion, it actually weakens your point. Let facts speak for themselves.

I fully understand that our view of our own ancestor’s actions during the Third Reich can be clouded. And at the same time it is perhaps part of the strategy to downplay Wilhelm’s role because restitution would be financially lucrative - which brings me back to Brecht’s quote.

„First the grub, then the morals.“ It would certainly earn my respect if the Hohenzollern turned that around and owned up to their ancestors' actions, no matter the outcome of the restitution claim.

The end.