Letter From Texas: Gott Mit Uns
by Egon Richard Tausch
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
As modern imperialism grows, even the regions within those countries under its rule become homogenized. Within the subnational regions, smaller ethnic enclaves, with their diverse cultures, tend to take one of two paths. They become tourist traps where the natives are totally ignorant of their own histories, differences, and contributions to the larger groups, until, eventually, everyone wears the same garb (lederhosen, feathered hats, kilts, identical regalia), employs the same false architecture, adopts the same fake accent, sings the same pseudo folk songs, dances the only folk dance he knows, and claims the same beliefs and ideologies. Or they just die out altogether. I don’t know whom this hurts worse—the larger “empire” or the enclaves. It certainly makes the world a duller place. And contrary to the philosophers, knowledge of history is its own virtue.
I first discovered this as a child. After living in Washington, D.C., for several years, my parents and I had returned to the Texas ranch that had been in our family since 1845. The culture clash between the East and Southwest was not as great as I had expected; too much time had passed. But I had been taught by my family, as well as by mounds of books, that we were Texas Germans, as was the entire Hill Country of the state, including the towns and cities of New Braunfels, Boerne, Fredericksburg, Dickinson, Seguin, Austin, San Antonio, Castroville, Hondo, up to what we still thought of as the western frontier—indeed, all of South-Central Texas.
Most of the Germans had arrived in Texas when it was still a republic, under the guidance of the Adelsverein (“The Noblemen’s Society for the Protection of German Immigrants in Texas”), led by Prince Karl von Solms-Braunfels (though he didn’t stay). It was not long before over one third of all Texans were German. Before the invention of barbed wire (1875), the Texas economy was based on cotton, so the Texas Germans raised it and owned slaves, though not as many as the East Texans did. As late as the eve of U.S. entry into World War I, a rally for the kaiser was held in Boerne among the (mostly) still German-speaking blacks, with the rallying cry: “Ve Chermans haff got to schtick togedder!”
The Texas Germans went on to fight valiantly for the United States after we entered the war, despite the closing of our schools and violent harassment by groups of drunken Anglo teenagers from San Antonio. I lost two uncles to gas attacks on the Western Front.
As late as the 1950’s, one could not buy groceries or feed in the small town nearest our ranch without knowing German. My grandfather founded New Braunfels High School, and almost all the textbooks were in German (though Greek and Latin—and English—were also taught). He was also the editor of the Neu-Braunfelser Zeitung, our first newspaper (since the 1850’s), and cofounder of our first bank (the Guaranty State Bank). This whole section of Texas was closely knit. After all, the Germans arrived in the 1830’s and 40’s not knowing whether they were immigrating to Mexico, an independent Texas republic, or the United States.
Differences among groups of Texas Germans were common. The influential founders of New Braunfels were largely Prussian, atheist (“freethinkers”), and townspeople; Fredericksburg was founded by Bavarians and other southern Germans, Roman Catholics, and country folk; the German towns to the east were largely Lutheran (Evangelisch) and from all parts of Germany and all occupations. In addition, there were the Forty-Eighters.
The only question that had interested children back in Washington, D.C., was whether they were Southerners or Northerners. After all, Washington had been a Southern city for most of its history, was the center of the War Between the States, and the mid-to-late 1950’s was the height of regional rivalry.
As soon as my family returned to Comal County, Texas, we ran into a similar conflict. I met the other descendants of the War Between the States. Every kid would announce that, although his own ancestors had fought for the Confederacy, everyone knew that the other Texas Germans had fought for the Union. About the time I concluded that the tooth fairy was a myth, I began to suspect that this Texas-Confederate history didn’t make sense. If every German-American Texan I met had Confederate soldier ancestors, including three progenitors of mine, how could this ethnic group have been so pro-Union?
At the University of Texas-Austin, I studied Texas history, and, for my master’s thesis, I decided to unravel the myth of German Unionism. This proved to be a hopeless task. Every textbook of Texas history I could find simply stated, without footnotes, details, or any other support, that the Texas Germans were pro-Union and were either neutral or fought for the North during the War. The only evidence given was a mention of the Nueces Massacre. The books I found on the involvement of Texas in the Confederacy produced the same scant evidence and cited only earlier general histories, which used almost the same words (and often had the same typographical errors). Those books concerning only the Texas Germans simply skipped the crisis of the South in which the Texas Germans played so great a part.
Several years ago, the myth of German Unionism reached its climax in a series of newspaper columns by the late Maury Maverick, Jr., in the San Antonio Express. Maverick was a left-wing columnist and the lawyer son of an equally left-wing mayor of San Antonio in the 1930’s; both devoted their lives to atoning for the sins of the patriarch of the clan, Sam Maverick, while keeping his money. Sam was not only a notorious cattleman (whence cometh the word maverick, which first meant “found” or stolen or rebranded cattle) but a Confederate officer and an anti-German, upon whose livestock he preyed. As a result, Maury Jr. defended Vietnam draft dodgers for a living and insisted that the Texas Germans shared his left-wing views. He began the series by stating that the Texas Germans fought for the North during the War Between the States and that “over a hundred German Unionists were lynched during the War and lived under a reign of terror.” (This would have been a surprise to Adm. Chester Nimitz of World War II fame, about whom Maury Jr. always wrote admiringly, since the admiral’s father, Capt. Charles Nimitz, had been the highest-ranking Confederate officer in the German area and was, indeed, the Confederate recruiting officer in charge of maintaining order.)
Several dozen Texas Germans challenged the series by Mr. Maverick on his allegations. After a lot of shilly-shallying, Maverick retreated to one mysterious nighttime murder, by unknown persons, for unknown reasons.
When presented with the facts and the statistics, most believers in the myth, including at one time even the New Braunfels Zeitung-Herald (successor to the Zeitung), merely declared that the Texas Germans must have been trying to “blend in” with the Anglo Confederates, an absurd proposition when one considers that there were among Anglos proportionately more Unionists than among the Germans. Germans overwhelmingly voted for secession, and pre-draft enlistment
figures bear this out. It is far more likely that some modern Texas Germans are trying to “blend in” with political correctness. It strains credulity to argue that the same Texas Germans praised by Maury Maverick, Jr., for their courage, the same people who produced Admiral Nimitz and General Eisenhower, would be so cowardly as to vote against their principles in secret ballot, fail to speak out publicly or join the Union Army, and even join the Confederate Army (before the draft) to shoot and be shot by Yankees—all out of fear of offending Anglo citizens.
While researching my thesis, I had to perfect my German in order to read the dozen German-language newspapers circulating in Texas before and during the war. I discovered that no one had ever read any of these archives between that time and mine. I also read every
German diary and private letter available, every letter to the Confederate and Reconstruction governors and legislatures in the State Archives, countless enlistment and unit rosters, and every published or unpublished primary source concerning the Texas Germans available at that time. My conclusions echoed those of John Arkas Hawgood in his 1940 book The Tragedy of German America:
So many fallacious statements have been made concerning the Germans in Texas during the late 1840’s, the 50’s, and the early 60’s, that perhaps it is wise here to express quite clearly . . . that the Germans were not . . . Abolitionists, . . . that they believed in states[’] rights, and that . . . a majority of them were loyal to the Confederate cause, many fought for it, and quite a number died for it.
These Germans came over to Texas in response to emigration propaganda in Germany, all of which stressed that, if you were an abolitionist or of the political left, you should go to New York City; if you were neutral or undecided, go to Missouri; if you were a conservative, go to New Orleans or Texas. Ferdinand Roemer’s Texas, which was widely read in Germany and distributed by the Adelsverein, warned those who were radical or opposed to slavery to avoid Texas.
In addition, Germany at that time was a loose confederation of autonomous states, similar to the United States under the Articles of Confederation. Those Germans were used to a system that respected states’ rights, and most were very leery of strong central government.
After 1850, Texas began receiving a trickle of refugees from the German Revolution of 1848—“die Gruene,” who were sometimes both radical and nationalistic. These new arrivals were not well received by the Germans who had come under the Adelsverein or before. Some of these Forty-Eighters formed the communistic Bettina Colony under the leadership of Gustav Schleicher, a friend of Friedrich Engels. The collective failed within two years, and Schleicher soon became the leader of the conservative and pro-states’-rights element in the Texas legislature.
The Democratic Party (then conservative and pro-states’ rights) won the enthusiastic allegiance of the Texas Germans thanks to the sudden growth of the anti-immigrant Nativist Party, the Know-Nothings. As the Know-Nothing Party became identified with nationalism, Unionism, and abolitionism, the Germans became more states’-rights and conservatively oriented.
There were occasional outbursts of radical sentiments (mostly on economic issues) among a few Forty-Eighters after that; a few singing societies were founded for political purposes; and one German newspaper editor, Adolf Douai, was chased out of San Antonio by the other Germans because of his abolitionist views. Even he did not believe that the federal government had any business meddling with slavery in the states.
German social life centered on the Turnvereine (athletic clubs). When the National Turnvereine denounced the South in 1859, all Texas Turnvereine immediately seceded, anticipating the Confederacy by two years.

The most influential German newspaper, the Neu-Braunfelser Zeitung, was edited by Dr. Ferdinand Lindheimer. According to R.L. Biesele—the first, and greatest, Texas German historian—Dr. Lindheimer was “the political barometer of the Germans in Texas.” His newspaper’s support for states’ rights, secession, and (through four difficult years) the Confederate war effort mirrored that of the Texas German population.
The first test of Texas German loyalty to the South was in the presidential election of 1860. It was a four-way race, with John C. Breckenridge representing the Southern Democrats and supported by secessionists; John Bell representing the Constitutional Union party, which hoped to hold North and South together by retaining states’ rights; Stephen A. Douglas representing the regular and Northern Democrats; and Abraham Lincoln for the Republicans.
No Texas German voted for Lincoln. Of the ten Texas counties that gave Bell and/or Douglas at least 40 percent of the vote, only one—Gillespie—had a substantial German population. Gillespie County voted against the secession candidate by only 52 percent. The other 17 heavily German counties, including Comal (which was the most populous and most German one), voted almost entirely for Breckenridge. For that matter, the least secessionist area, western Gillespie County, gave a larger percentage of its votes to Breckenridge than did any non-German western county. A fear, common in all the western counties, of frontier isolation in the face of savage Indians accounts for its hesitation toward secession.
Upon the election of Abraham Lincoln, Comal and Gillespie Counties called for a state convention to discuss secession, as did the Neu-Braunfelser Zeitung, which reminded Germans that, just as they had renounced their allegiance to European despots, they should do the same to Yankee ones. All other German newspapers called for secession, except for one, the smallest, which called for caution and deliberation before such a step. Every German delegate at the Texas Convention voted for immediate secession.
On February 23, 1861, the question went to the citizens of Texas. Of the 17 German counties, only five voted against secession. Five of them favored it by 90 percent. Comal County—again, the most populous and most German—did so by 73 percent. In Fayette County, which had a large Anglo Unionist element and a Unionist newspaper, only 10 of the 400 German voters voted against secession. Of the 29 Texas counties that had a substantial unionist vote, only 5 had any German population to speak of.
Once the war broke out, Texas Germans joined the Confederate Army in droves. As early as December 1860, Lindheimer had urged the Germans to organize military companies of minutemen to “protect the rights of the South.” By the middle of July, two volunteer infantry and two cavalry companies had been formed in New Braunfels—one led by the mayor, Gustav Hoffman, a former Prussian officer. Before the military draft was instituted, two thirds of the enfranchised population of Comal County were armed and in the field.
Gustav Schleicher organized units that would fight nobly in the Red River Campaign. Many of the first companies in Galveston were German to a man. The first Houston company to appear in the field was German. Most of their flags were embroidered “Fuer die Constitution” and “Gott Mit Uns.”
Fayette County formed a company of Germans that joined and fought with the famed Terry’s Texas Rangers in all of its battles, including Perryville, where Colonel Terry was killed. The last commander of Terry’s Texas Rangers was one of these Germans.
German units formed important parts of the New Mexico Campaign, the Battle of Galveston, the Red River Campaign, and even served in Hood’s Texas Brigade under General Lee in Virginia.
The ladies of German towns formed Southern Aid Societies, raising funds and making provisions for the troops. One such group in Fredericksburg alone raised over $5,000 for the cause and made countless uniforms and bandages.
There were, of course, some who were disloyal to the Confederate cause in Ger man as well as Anglo counties. In Fredericksburg, the aforementioned Capt. Charles Nimitz was physically attacked and put in danger of his life by an Anglo-American bandit leader because some of his men had been drafted. In the later suppression of Unionists, Confederate German troops were often sent to arrest disaffected Anglo citizens.
Maury Maverick, Jr., cited Duff’s Partisan Rangers as the greatest terror of Texas Unionists. August Siemering, a German of Fredericksburg who had formerly been a Unionist, was Duff’s lieutenant. R.H. Williams’ firsthand account of Duff’s partisans, With the Border Ruffians, recounts that even Duff’s fanatic scouring for Unionists in Gillespie County could only turn up “four or five men, and eight women with their little ones.”
This brings us back to the aforementioned Nueces Massacre. On August 1, 1862, 61 men met in Kerr County, with the intention of leaving Texas. Most of them were Germans and very recent arrivals in the State; some were Anglos, and a handful were Mexicans. Ted Fehrenbach, in Lone Star, his definitive history of Texas, and many other historians have pointed out that this group had no particular ideology and no intention of joining the federal forces; they just wanted to avoid a war of which they’d had no advance notice. Upon reaching the Nueces River, they were attacked by Duff’s Partisan Rangers, who were guided by a German, Charles Bergmann of Fredericksburg. In the fight that followed, 19 of the refugees were killed, and 9 were wounded. Several witnesses later reported that the wounded were murdered. Thirty-three refugees escaped, of whom eight were killed later while attempting to cross the Rio Grande. None of the survivors ever chose to join the federals after entering Mexico, where they were met by Union forces.
It is not excusing such barbaric, behind-the-lines persecution to point out that this murderous slaughter of harmless, multiethnic draft evaders has no bearing on the question of whether Germans were, as a group, enthusiastic supporters of the Confederacy. But, somehow, an inscribed monument was recently built in Comfort, Texas, which honors these victims as being “Loyal to the Union.” A novel, Rebels in Blue, was even written about them, ignoring the refugees’ equal avoidance of both the Blue and the Gray.
It is often forgotten that Texas was under martial law throughout most of the war. This constitutional atrocity has turned out to be a windfall for historians, because my old mentor, Dr. H. Bailey Carroll of the University of Texas, managed to turn up the court-martial records of civilians, which accompany martial law.
The court-martial trials were convened in San Antonio, beginning on July 2, 1862, continuing through the greatest Unionist activity, and concluding after the Nueces Massacre. The court tried all those arrested in the Hill Country and Bexar County. Seventeen Anglo-Americans were tried, and over two thirds were found guilty of disloyalty. Only 12 Germans were prosecuted, and of these, only 5 were found guilty. Their punishment was imprisonment for the duration of the war. Prominent Germans testified for both the defense and the prosecution. In most of the cases, the evidence was all hearsay, and even that was nebulous. Julius Schlickum was accused of singing a Yankee song while drunk. In one case against a German, the charge of disloyalty rested on the accusation that the defendant appeared happy upon reading of a Confederate defeat. His accuser could not remember having heard the defendant actually say anything; instead, he judged by the latter’s facial expression. One German was charged with having had a New York German newspaper at his store. He answered that his customers could read no English, and local German papers had no European news. Another German, accused of having spoken only of Confederate defeats, explained that, during the week the witness knew him, the South had had no victories.
Again, it is no defense of such police-state tactics to point out that these trials show less disloyalty to the Confederacy among Germans than among Anglos—insofar as they show anything, save that no government should really be trusted. It should, in fairness to Confederate authorities, be mentioned that such arrests and trials were much more common in the North. President Lincoln managed to arrest the legislature of Maryland, and Northern prisons were full of suspected Copperheads, who enjoyed no right of habeas corpus (it was suspended by Lincoln), let alone a hearing of any sort, military or otherwise.
Before, during, and after these trials in San Antonio, hundreds of Texas Anglos fled Texas to join the Union Army. They were not so unfortunate as the group caught on the Nueces River, however, so they have been largely forgotten. I would welcome any evidence that one Texas German ever wore the Blue.
Once, when a former member of the Know-Nothing Party made a slighting reference to Germans, the Neu-Braunfelser Zeitung replied that, proportionately, German-speaking soldiers were more numerous than any other language group among Confederate Texans and urged that a survey be made to determine German participation in and support for the Confederacy in order to prove their loyalty forever. Unfortunately, no such survey was ever conducted—a fact that might be the only one that matters for modern Americans, who are accustomed to weekly polls of the population on every question or opinion imaginable. However, at the time, there was a war going on.
The privation suffered during wartime had no relation to nationality, and the German families left behind while their men were off fighting had their share. In some areas, the women did all the farm work; in others, German families had to depend on the charity of their neighbors to survive. The well-known thrift of German families was ineffectual in the face of a rapidly depreciating currency. Indian depredations and bandit raids increased dramatically during the war, and many German soldiers who went to war to protect their homes against the Yankees returned to find their homes burned and livestock stolen by Indians or thieves.
As late as the close of May 1865, Ferdinand Lindheimer was still writing editorials in the Neu-Braunfelser Zeitung urging greater sacrifices for the survival of the Confederacy. Finally, on June 2, 1865, he printed a letter in German that he had received from a Lieutenant Bitter, CSA. In translation, it states:
As you should know, our company F, 32 Texas Cavalry is coming back home today. It is true we are not coming back as everybody wished, as victors in the cause for which the county sent us, but our conscience is clear that we have done at every occasion our full duty, and that our behavior and good German honor gave us the respect of all our war companions, as of the citizens in that part of the country in which we have been. We have earned this honor and still hold it. Even in the last time of common demoralization of the Army, every citizen felt protected as long as Company “F” was near.
He closed the letter with the slogan inscribed on his battle flag: “Gott mit uns.” God be with us.
Egon Richard Tausch is an attorney in San Antonio, Texas.
This article first appeared in the August 2007 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].


1 Comment by John Q. Public on 9 August 2007:
“And contrary to the philosophers, knowledge of history is its own virtue.” -E.R. Tausch
So true & actual as well, it is.
It’s an OLD trick manipulation of the past, of history and its alteration as an instrument of present political control. We are conceptual creatures and so the accepted narrative (even when falacious or myth ‘as if’ fact) becomes the lion’s share of policy & behaviour, the shrewd know.
If philosophers as you suggest above, or many of them deny knowledge of history is its own virtue, I’d bet it’s for one or both of these reasons. A.) makes philosophy seem more important if it is suggested the past doesn’t lead to the present; or that even with the advantage of hindsight we still can’t be sure about the past. B.) or, said philosopher is in the employ of whoever is engaged in rewriting the past history for present political advantage.
It’s all relative also to location. Notice since it’s Texas the Germans are wrongfully disparaged as having supported the North. Of course if up North and this is done to the Germans they would have to be wrongfully slandered as having supported the South, and the history books altered or edited.
It’s an OLD trick, re-writing the past. It’s second nature as a competitive tool to many cultures, sadly. I.e. they consider it square one, or first things first, the proverbial starting gate.
It’s always hugely tempting because it’s such a powerful LEVER, to have the past on YOUR side in the Present narrative. You know the old joke too don’t you – ‘anyone who doesn’t write (or re-write) their own history doesn’t deserve one.’
My suggestion is that EVERYONE become Conscious of this and compete themselves in behalf of rewriting history for their own present advantage so at least it’s a horserace… rather than a runaway Farce. No?
Right? “Have philosopher, will travel…” – I can just hear the cash registers opening and closing now.
“Yes, what does he do? He’s my resident historian/creative philosopher…our most imporant employee, thank you very much.”
One shouldn’t ‘deny’ myths of the past (not necessary), one should always agree and just say, ‘oh, yes, I wish.’
Or as Chief Bromden said famously in Ken Kesey’s “One Flew Over the Coo-coo’s Nest” …
“It’s true, even if it didn’t happen.”
(that’s why he’s chief)
__________________________________________
2 Comment by Clyde Wilson on 9 August 2007:
Compatriot, this is a great historical contribution. The same story could be told about other supposed “Unionists” in the South. Actually, East Tennessee and West Virginia were not “Unionist”—they merely had more traitors than other parts of the South. Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware, and even West Virginia
elected ex-Confederates to office after The War—as soon as the occupation troops were removed.
3 Comment by Philip Candido on 9 August 2007:
While researching my thesis, I had to perfect my German in order to read the dozen German-language newspapers circulating in Texas before and during the war. I discovered that no one had ever read any of these archives between that time and mine.
What is most frightening about this, is it forces one to wonder, what other events do we receive information that bears no actual research, but the mere citing of secondary sources, which only guessed or went on what a teacher told them?
I find most histories of the Spanish inquisition to be of a similar bend. The popular stories of massacres and torture are dispelled when one reads the Latin and Spanish documents, which clearly show torture was rarely used and most defendants went away with a penance rather than a scar. The wildly exaggerated claims, which in a High School text I had claimed the Inquisition’s victims comprised of a figure more than 50% of the Spanish population at the time, are simply not justified by any fact. And, while the real history of the Inquisition is exaggerated into a tale of genocide, the gruesome murder of priests and nuns and Catholic laymen by French Revolutionaries is minimized to the greatest degree!
Can we really trust any history, especially now that men can obtain doctorates without knowing Latin or any major European language, or can write doctoral dissertations on people whose language they can not speak? Think of all the junk history about the sentiments of German Texans, because the writers couldn’t read German! Imagine someone writing a dissertation on Republicanism in the Early Roman Empire, who couldn’t read Latin! What a farse that would be, yet it passes for history in so many institutions of “learning”.
I thank Mr. Tausch for his scholarship and I wish there were more like him writing history. Sadly there are not.
4 Comment by robert m. peters on 9 August 2007:
Much of my childhood was spent on and on the banks of the Cane River, a fifty-six-mile-long lake which was until the 1830’s the main channel of the Red River. The quaint town of Natchitoches lies along the Cane.
During my “Cane moments,” I became aware of a people who spoke English with a different accent and who ofttimes spoke French, I also came to learn that there was a black version of these people, a mulatto version of these people and a white version of these people, often with similar or the same names. I also came to learn that all three versions of these people had owned slaves – some of them huge plantations – and had to one degree or another supported the Confederacy. We also came to know these people as Louisiana Creoles, a Creoles being by Louisiana standard anyone who had an ancestor who had come directly from France or Spain to Louisiana before the Louisiana Purchase. Always excluded were the Cajuns, who were seen by us Anglos and by the Creoles as yet another “other” group.
In 1990, an attorney asked me, because I speak French, and two other French speakers to interview a group of about fifty of these Cane River Creoles who still spoke some French. The attorney was concerned because their children, who were already married adults, spoke no French. He wanted us to tape the interviews. One of the two other French speakers in our group was a native of France. As we began our conversations, my native-speaking colleague asked me if I could understand them and what I heard. I could indeed understand them very well. I told him that I heard a non-contemporary French which was certainly not Cajun. He said, correct as far as you have taken it; but you’ve missed something. He asked, rhetorically, when had the French come to the Cane River? Beginning in 1714, the 18th century, I dutifully replied. He grinned and said, “Correct! But they are speaking a mid-19th century French. My ear had not caught that at all. We had assumed that they were the descendants of those Frenchmen who came into and populated the region from 1714 to 1754. We also knew that descendants of those people, the 18th century ones existed on the Cane in great numbers, for records were kept in French in Natchitoches Parish until 1866 with the coming of the Yankees. Who then were these people? Well, each of them gave a somewhat different story of their origins; however, the common thread was that their ancestors had come to the region of the Cane sometime at or just after 1867 from Mexico. We hypothesized but have never been able to prove that there ancestors may a been a French remnant of Maximilian’s French advisor’s or legion. They came to Louisiana during Reconstruction under which the stern process of “Americanization” began in earnest. Since Maximilian was an enemy of the Republican administration, the newcomers would not have wanted to be obvious and would have attempted to blend into to the first vestige of French culture which they had encountered coming back up the El Camino Real. They arrived at precisely the time that courthouse records were changing from French to English. Yet, we can only wonder who they really are or were. Almost all of the people whom we interviewed in 1990 are dead. The language which they spoke died with them. There are no records available to speak for them. They are indeed of French ancestry, but they are neither Creoles nor Cajuns. Perhaps this is where the myths of history begin: someone quotes this site and notes “Remnant of Maximilian’s Legion Found on Cane.” The plausibility argument which I have presented is given as fact and a speculation becomes reality. Perhaps, someday, some document will appear to lend credibility to our informed musings. We must remember that not everyone held to be a Creole is one and that the real story might be quite different from that one commonly told.
5 Comment by Clyde Wilson on 10 August 2007:
Mr. Candido, how ever bad you think it is, it is worse.
6 Comment by PcH on 10 August 2007:
Well done! I love a good history and this was informative as well as intriguing.
It is also refreshing to read of Germans not described either as evil Huns or as Kelticke-killing Socialist ‘48ers.
7 Comment by Fitzhugh Pannill on 10 August 2007:
Mr. Tausch:
Thank you for a fascinating and informative article, and for going to the trouble to actually determine the truth.
Most of my ancestors arrived in Texas at the end of the War and were from Virginia and Georgia. (All of them were loyal Southerners and all the men of military age were Confederate veterans). Still, we had a couple of inlaws over the years of German ancestry, and their ancestors had all fought for the Confederacy. In spite of that, I had always heard and never questioned that the Texas Germans were pro-union and against secession. I think it may have been taught in school here in Texas. In fact, I had heard and believed that the Legislature had to gerrymander the German districts in order to get a unanimous vote in favor of secession. I stand corrected. To paraphrase Mark Twain (whose works one of my German inlaws refused to read because Twain was a deserter), it was not so much that I was ignorant, as that much of what I knew was not true.
As a student at the University of Texas, I took German (the lines were short at registration) and knew a number of relatively-pure Germans from Central Texas. I knew, as you pointed out, that the Texas Germans included large numbers of both Catholics and Lutherans. I also knew, from various sources, that the Texas Germans were, as a group, very well-educated when they came here. I had always believed they were largely political dissidents who left Germany following the aborted revolution of 1848, which was why they opposed secession. Sadly, none of my German friends still spoke German, even at home. You could go to Fredericksburg in those days (the 60s) and hear the cashier and customers at grocery stores speaking German—but they would fall silent when a stranger approached.
It is sad that the Germans have largely lost their cultural heritage, but they kept it longer than most. It is also understandable: they had lives to live, like the rest of us, and could not very well be expected to be permanent museum pieces.
The Texas Germans also had some bad experiences with their Anglo fellow citizens: one of my good friends was old Fred Lange, of Texas Land Title fame. At the outset of the madness known as World War I, the sheriff of Harris County confiscated the Lange family’s complete German library, including primarily German classics, in the belief that it was subversive. The family never got it back.
Speaking of museums, the studio of Elizabet Ney, a famous sculptress and freethinker, was made into a museum in North Austin. It is very interesting, and if you have not seen it, it is worth the trouble. If it is still there. But don’t go in the summer, as it is not air-conditioned.
Fitzhugh Pannill
8 Comment by Allen Wilson on 11 August 2007:
Thank you, Mr tausch, for this light in a corner of Southern history hitherto vieled by darkness. I had no idea that Texas Germans had made such a big contribution to the Confederate war effort. From what little I know about pre-20th century German political history, their support of states’ should have been predictable.
Perhaps I can add an interesting side note on German influence on Southern food. Both of my grandmothers used to make sauerkraut before canned kraut became common in the stores, and they had learnt to make it from their mothers. By the time I was born, both had stopped making it since it could be bought at the store in cans. However, I was lucky enough to eat some kraut that my maternal grandmother made just a few years before she died, and it was nothing like common store bought kraut. It was mild in taste, not nearly as sour as the storebought, and far better than any kraut I had ever eaten.
Of course, kraut-making must have been brought to the South when Germans first came over in colonial times, then spread to the Anglos.
Many Southerners dont know that bagpipes are part of the Southern tradition, passed down through the generations in certain Southern families. Perhaps kraut making is another one of these unrecognised parts of the Southern tradition. It may also be true that, just like different regions of Germany, the South has it’s own unique kind of native kraut, which has never been mass produced.
Sorry for introducing this tangent, but I couldn’t resist.
9 Comment by John Q. Public on 12 August 2007:
Off topic Mitt Romney’s bad dye job has improved. Whereas before it was jet black with symmetrical little south american shaped swatches of grey only at the temples…(he must be reading this site-?-wherein I gave him some constructive criticism on that)…Now he looks much more falsely rugged with grey more or less dappled-in everywhere. No wonder besides spending millions he was able to get almost 5Thousand straw votes in Iowa. It’s worth it – to get to that blind tax pool of trillions every year. Even if you have to swallow a little vanity and start to look more or less your age. He’s the typical sport with hundreds of millions who knows to get into the muti-billionaires club that only gets done thru Govt. and ’serving’ the people. Ain’t America grand?! (I’m glad I could help.) Got Mitt?
10 Comment by S.Huber on 13 August 2007:
Thank you Mr. Tausch. As a Texas German myself (descended from the Evangelisch who came to then Fayette county), I had always accepted the myth that most Texas Germans were unionists, in spite of the fact that one of my own ancestors joined the Confederate army before the draft, and that, according to his memoirs, he reported with a large company of other Germans to a friend’s (also German) farm for his induction.
I recall reading an account of Waul’s Texas Legion (in which my great-great grandfather served) in which an observer commented that one heard more German and Yiddish in their camp than English. There were supposedly a large number of Poles as well. Until I read Mr. Tausch’s article I assumed that most of these men had been exceptions like my ancestor or else had been forcibly drafted and served to avoid the fate of the victims of the Nueces Massacre. Now I know better.
Thanks again to Mr. Tausch and Chronicles for this article.
11 Comment by S.Huber on 13 August 2007:
In light of the myth of Texas German unionism I also used to think it was a little odd that when Fayette county was subdivided into smaller counties, the heavily German population named one of these new counties “Lee” after their favorite general.
12 Comment by Hewitt Clarke on 15 August 2007:
I found the information about Fermans in Confederate Texas most interesting. Like most other people in Texas I thought that most Germans “didn’t have a dog in that fight” and disnt support the Confederacy. I guess ort of my attitude was the Truer der Union group from Comfort tht was attacked by the Confederates. Anyway I guess all this information should have been anticipated as part of the PC efort to change history.
I was recently at the Sam Houston Museum in Huntsville and pointed out several things that I considered misinformation to the lady in charge. The information stated that Sam Houston never pledged allegience to the Confederacy whic is false since he raised his right hand to support the Confederate Governmnt in April 1861 t Independence. TX.
They said he was a member of the No NOthing Party No Nothing Party because he opposed slavery. What nonsense, He owned 11 slaves when he died.
The said that Texas was one of the last states to join the Confederacy and only did so because other states around them had joined.
The lady at the museum said whe would tell the director about my corrections. I tol her to forgot it, that the directors knew better but were following a revisionists agender.
Thanks for getting me straight about the Germans in Texas.
Hewitt Clarke
13 Pingback by Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture | Your Home for Traditional Conservatism » LEISURE, THE BASIS OF CULTURE: August 2007 on 22 August 2007:
[...] Letter From Texas: Gott Mit Uns by Egon Richard Tausch [...]
14 Comment by Jerry Nelson on 18 September 2007:
Another myth destroyed! Or at least it will be we repeat this story often enough.
There is one point that Tausch makes that makes me somewhat uneasy, and that is his acceptance of the “Nueces Massacre” as fact without further explanation. According to what I remember reading in “Horse Sweat and Gunpowder,” which contains an account taken from the records of Duff’s cavalry, it was a lengthy battle which continued into the night and ended with a dawn attack. The “Unionists” were in a well-selected position of natural strength. They held off Duff’s cavalry for many hours and, according to the Confederates’ report, were as well-armed or even better so than the cavalrymen.
15 Trackback by the articles of confederation on 23 September 2007:
the articles of confederation…
…
16 Trackback by Ethaan on 30 September 2007:
Ethaan…
This was one time where I have to agree to disagree…
17 Comment by Charles W. Scheel on 10 October 2007:
I am very thankful for Mr. Tausch’s article upon which I stumbled quite inadvertently while playing with Google, as I will be able to correct no later than tomorrow morning some statements I had made only last week in front of my students in an American literature course I am now giving at the University Paul Verlaine-Metz (France). As an introduction to my course on Larry McMurtry’s novel The Last Picture Show I had given those students a few elements on Texas history, mostly taken from Wikipedia, which mentions the Nueces massacre. Not knowing any better, I had been led to generalize Texan-German resistance to Abolitionism. While I am at it I will draw the attention of my MA-history majors to Mr. Tausch’s article as an illustration of what serious research can still uncover!
18 Comment by Penny Willrich on 20 December 2007:
This was all facinating information but I want to know about the African Americans or African slaves that were brought to Texas with these Germans. There are a number of persons in this country with German surnames, who need to have both closure and information about their heritage. Include the history of the African Americans that often accompanied these Germans. It is not enough to just refer to those persons as slaves. They are persons who have a history and families that would like to know their history and heroism.
19 Comment by Mike G. on 28 February 2008:
In doing research for my Senior Seminar paper, I came across your article. I applaud your research, as you’ve gone quite in depth for much of the details. As to the mention that none of the survivors of the Nueces River Massacre joined federal forces, I’m afraid you got that wrong, however. My great (x3) grandfather, Adolph Zoeller, was a survivor that fled into Mexico. He made it to New Orleans and joined the Union army and it is said that a few of the other survivors joined with him, including John W. Sansom. I believe Adolph’s unit was the 1st Texas Volunteers. After the war, he was even a member of the Texas House of Representatives. He died in Kendall Country in 1909.
20 Comment by Karla D. on 13 March 2008:
My great-great grandfather was Captain Adolph Zoeller, who was one of the men that was involved with the Unionists that were on their way to Mexico when they were ambushed on the Nueces River. He, and a few other Germans, had gone on ahead of the men that actually were ambushed, that is why they survived to make it to join the Union troops. He served under Edmund J. Davis in the 1st Texas Cavalry. I actually possess the original papers that discharged him from service, as well as a medal that he was given for his service.
21 Comment by Mike G. on 18 April 2008:
I would love to see Adolph’s papers sometime! Funny how small the world is… I live in San Antonio, TX. Adolph had a daughter named Bertha who married Otto Wille. One of their children, Lina, is my great grandmother. She married Philip Strauch and their daughter, Bertha, is my grandmother. My grandmother married Troy Hess and had my mother Debra, who married my dad, Charles Glade. I’m pretty easy to find in San Antonio. I would love to know where you fit in the tree as our family history is so fascinating to me. I will need to look up more information about Edmund J. Davis so I can include this in the paper. Amazing!
22 Comment by Karla D. on 9 May 2008:
I would love to get together some time and discuss/share info. Adolph had a son named Max, who was my great-grandfather. Max’s daughter, Emmie, was my grandmother, and her son, Melvin Bohnert is my dad. We actually still own, and use the original Max Zoeller home (close to Capt. Zoeller’s home) on weekends. It is located on Zoeller lane in Waring, Texas, down from Zoeller Cemetary. I am trying to work on the paper work to get Adolph honored as a founding father of Kendall County. I just need to find the time to put all the paperwork together.
Was Bertha the daughter that died shortly after the birth of her last child? I believe that I have a picture of Otto and Max working in the field out in front of Captain Zoeller’s house. If you would like a copy, I can arrange to get one to you.