99. Anne Summers, ‘Militarism in Britain before the Great War’, History Workshop Journal, 2 (1976), pp. 104–23; John M. Mackenzie (ed.), Popular Imperialism and the Military, 1850–1950 (Manchester, 1992).
100. Ulrich, Vogel and Ziemann, Untertan in Uniform, p. 21.
101. Stargardt, German Idea, pp. 132–3, 142; Jeffrey Verhey, The Spirit of 1914. Militarism, Myth and Mobilisation in Germany (New York, 2000).
102. Robert von Friedeburg, ‘Klassen-, Geschlechter- oder Nationalidentität? Handwerker und Tagelöhner in den Kriegervereinen der neupreussischen Provinz Hessen-Nassau 1890–1914’, in Ute Frevert (ed.), Militär und Gesellschaft im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 1997), pp. 229–44.
103. Roger Chickering, ‘Der “Deutsche Wehrverein” und die Reform der deutschen Armee 1912–1914’, Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen, 25 (1979), pp. 7–33; Stig Förster, Der doppelte Militarismus. Die deutsche Heeresrüstungspolitik zwischen Status-quo-Sicherung und Aggression 1890–1913 (Stuttgart, 1985), pp. 208–96; Volker Berghahn, Germany and the Approach of War in 1914 (London, 1973), esp. pp. 5–24.
104. Hucko (ed.), Democratic Tradition, pp. 139, 141.
105. On army expenditure as a ‘structural weakness’ in the constitutional system of the Empire, see Huber, Verfassungsgeschichte, vol. 4, Struktur und Krisen des Kaiserreichs, pp. 545–9; Dieter C. Umbach, Parlamentsauflösung in Deutschland. Verfassungsgeschichte und Verfassungsprozess (Berlin, 1989), pp. 221, 1227–9; John Iliffe, Tanganyika Under German Rule, 1905–1912 (Cambridge, 1969), p. 42.
106. Stahl, ‘Preussische Armee’, in Hauser (ed.), Preussen und das Reich, pp. 181–246.
107. Wilhelm Deist, ‘Kaiser Wilhelm II in the context of his military and naval entourage’, in John C. G. Röhl and Nicholas Sombart (eds.), Kaiser Wilhelm II. New Interpretations (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 169–92, here pp. 182–3.
108. Wilhelm Deist, ‘Kaiser Wilhelm II als Oberster Kriegsherr’, in Röhl (ed.), Der Ort, p. 30; id., ‘Entourage’ in Röhl and Sombart (eds.), Wilhelm II, pp. 176–8.
109. Huber, Heer und Staat (2nd edn, Hamburg, 1938), p. 358.
110. Deist, ‘Oberster Kriegsherr’, in Röhl (ed.), Der Ort, pp. 25–42, here p. 26. On the military dimension of William’s sovereignty more generally, see Elisabeth Fehrenbach, Wandlungen des Kaisergedankens 1871–1918 (Munich, 1969), pp. 122–4, 170–72.
111. Leutwein to General Staff, Okahandja, 25 April 1904, Reichskolonialamt: ‘Akten betreffend den Aufstand der Hereros im Jahre 1904, Bd. 4, 16 April 1904–4. Juni 1904’, Bundesarchiv Berlin, R1001/2114, Bl. 52. I am very grateful to Marcus Clausius for making available to me his transcriptions of correspondence regarding SWA from the Bundesarchiv Berlin.
112. Proclamation, Colonial Troop Command, Osombo-Windhoek, 2 October 1904, copy held in Reichskanzlei, ‘Differenzen zwischen Generalleutnant v. Trotha und Gouverneur Leutwein bezügl. der Aufstände in Dtsch. Süwestafrika im Jahre 1904’, Bundesarchiv Berlin, R1001/2089, Bl. 7.
113. Trotha to Chief of the General Staff, Okatarobaka, 4 October 1904 in ibid., Bl. 5–6. For an even more extreme formulation of his objectives, see Trotha to Leutwein, Windhoek, 5 November 1904 (copy), in ibid., Bl. 100–102: ‘I know enough tribes in Africa. They are all the same in that they will only bow to violence. To apply this violence with blatant terrorism and even with cruelty was and is my policy. I annihilate the insurgent tribes with streams of blood and streams of money. Only on this foundation can something enduring take root’ (!).
114. Leutwein to Foreign Office Colonial Department, Windhoek, 28 October 1904 in ibid., Bl. 21–2.
115. Leutwein to Foreign Office, Windhoek, 23 October 1904, excerpted in ibid.