Hacker News Reader

Comment by pge | Hacker News Reader

I had learned the story of the battle of teutoberg forest when studying roman history (in which it looms large as a shocking and humiliating defeat), and I was surprised when I spent some time living and working in Germany that none of my German colleagues had ever heard of Hermann or the battle (as I expected it to be a relevant date in the timeline of Germany’s formation of identity).

View on HN

This has several reasons, I think.

- Modern Germans don't really see themselves as descendants of those Germans, in the German language both are named differently. Modern Germans are 'Deutsche' - ancient Germans are 'Germanen'. English does not make this distinction. There are more annoying confusions like this, for example, the Germanic tribe of the Saxons has nothing to do with the modern state of Saxony, as the ancestors of modern Saxons spoke a different dialect. There are several breaks like this in between modern Germany and Germanic tribes which are masked by nomenclature.

- German (Deutsche) Catholics distanced themselves from the 'barbaric', non-Christian Germanic tribes.

- As usual, the Nazis ruined it. The battle was sometimes used for propaganda reasons by the Nazis, replacing Romans with Jews. Modern Nazis are also using it for their own purposes (replacing Romans with immigrants and the US)

Edit: the battle itself isn't silenced or anything, I do remember quite a few events when the 2000 year anniversary happened, including the cover of the SPIEGEL having it (IIRC?)

Very interesting. So are the modern Germans descendents of the 'barbaric' ones? Is the distinction made only for separating the earlier pagans from the Christianized tribes? And is the distancing only for religious, or for cultural reasons as well? I mean, were the modern Germans really more 'civilized' (whatever that means) than the barbaric ones, or is it just propaganda?

The distinction is strongly related to the habit of claiming Charlemagne as the founding myth. Makes a lot more sense as a precursor of the EU, but in the fast-forward way history is taught at school, this is usually the point where the wording shifts from "tribes who lived in the same geographic area" to "a precursor state".

People who want to identify with victory over Romans to fuel a nationalistic mindset won't stop at Arminius, they also claim the legacy of various gothic etc tribes who troubled and/or continued thedying western empire.

Yes, I'm a German and I didn't hear of it.

If you look at central Europe in the last 2000 year it isn't surprising I think, most of the time it looks like a giant disaster.

Really? May be a generation thing. I'm in my 40s now and we learned about that battle around 6th grade. And this was on a Hauptschule (secondary modern school) where I spent two years.

Also German TV is full of historic documentaries about that time - at lest the public service broadcasters (phoenix, zdf info, arte, etc). Of course you will not notice that if you only follow the private channels.

hermansdenkmal is a lot less catchy, than Herman the German, but many people have see in picture or film.

However I would guess, that your colleagues just forgot about the 'Schlacht im Teuteborger Wald', because it definitely visit part of the history curriculum.

In modern days the French Revolution as a well as Bismarcks doing have the focus for the 'identity' of Germany.

just like the last ice age, its tangential but not defining. I did hear it mentioned, but I probably can only remember it because of the alluded connection to the autonym of the germans: teute~deuts*.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com