The Legacy of Alsace-Lorraine and the Franco-Prussian War

This was my final paper in Dr. Jason Johnson’s European Frontiers class at Trinity University. It has been slightly modified for this site.

Introduction

The regions of Alsace and Lorraine, located on the Franco-German border in the modern French Republic have had a complex history. They are two areas that have consistently been under the rule of various entities throughout history and lie at a crossroads between French and German cultures. They form a region of strategic importance due to its geographic location, rich economic resources, and cultural significance to French and German cultures. Throughout the 19th century, as Germany emerged as a unified power under Prussian leadership, it sought to consolidate its position in Europe. The regions of Alsace and Lorraine became focal points in this ambition. In 1871, following its victory in the Franco-Prussian War, Germany annexed Alsace-Lorraine, fueling a bitter rivalry with France that would echo through the history of both nations, furthering tensions and contributing to the onset of future conflicts. The annexation of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany, far from securing Germany’s status as a European hegemon, set off a chain of diplomatic and military conflicts that ultimately led to Germany’s catastrophic defeats in the World Wars and its devastation.

Franco-Prussian War and Annexation

Before we can understand why Germany decided to annex Alsace-Lorraine, we must first examine the factors that led to the Franco-Prussian War. France, having established itself as the dominant continental power following the Franco-Austrian War of 1859, found its position threatened by Prussia’s rapid ascent during the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. The subsequent formation of the North German Confederation under Prussian leadership alarmed France, as it signaled a possible shift in the balance of European power. French public opinion hardened against Prussia, which was now perceived as an imminent threat. Bismarck recognized this as an opportunity to unify the southern German states with the North and formed defensive alliances with the southern German states of Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, and Hesse-Darmstadt. By this point, war between the two powers was only a matter of time. In Prussia, some officials considered a war against France both inevitable and necessary to arouse German nationalism in those states that would allow the unification of a greater German Empire. In his memoirs Bismarck stated, “I did not doubt that a Franco-German War must take place before the construction of a United Germany could be achieved” ¹. Bismarck also knew that France should be the aggressor in the conflict to bring the four southern German states to side with Prussia. While tensions rose between the two powers, the immediate cause of the war was the candidacy of Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen to the throne of Spain. France feared the encirclement resulting from an alliance between Prussia and Spain. While the candidacy was withdrawn under French diplomatic pressure, Bismarck used this opportunity to provoke the French into war. He released an altered summary of the Ems Telegram, a telegram sent by William I discussing the French demands, making it sound as if the king had demeaned the French envoy, which inflamed public opinion in France and became cause for war. A crowd of 15.000-20,000 people, carrying flags and patriotic banners, marched through the streets of Paris, demanding war. On July 19th, 1870, the French sent a declaration of war to the Prussian government. The southern German states immediately sided with Prussia, and the Franco-Prussian war began.

The war itself lasted just over six months. The war culminated in the Siege of Paris, leading to a harsh French surrender in January 1871. The unification of Germany was proclaimed in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles, a symbolic location chosen to display Prussia’s ascendancy over France. The Treaty of Frankfurt marked the end of the war, establishing French war reparations to the newly formed German Empire and the cession of Alsace of parts of Lorraine to Germany. The decision to take these territories was a topic of debate within Germany. Military leaders believed it would serve as a strategic military border. Considering that ethnic identity and nationalism were often based primarily on language at the time, certain nationalists in Germany aimed to unite the German-speaking population with the newly formed German Empire. Nationalist extremist Heinrich von Treitschke wrote a widely-circulated pamphlet in 1870 claiming: “These territories are ours by the right of the sword, and we shall dispose them in virtue of a higher right, the right of the German nation, which will not permit its lost children to remain strangers to the German Empire” ². Some German industrialists did not want competition from Alsatian industries, such as the cloth makers who would be exposed to competition from the sizeable industry in Mulhouse. Others believed that the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine would lead to dangerous consequences in the future. During the war, Karl Marx warned his fellow Germans: “If Alsace and Lorraine are taken, then France will later make war on Germany in conjunction with Russia. It is unnecessary to go into the unholy consequences” ³. The thoughts of Bismarck himself are a source of debate among historians. After the war, Bismarck claimed that he was initially opposed to it, as he thought that it would engender permanent French enmity toward Germany. Despite this, there is also evidence that he bought into the nationalist ideas of Alsace-Lorraine as a German territory. Bismarck said in one of his speeches “the more the residents of Alsace feel themselves to be Alsatians, the more they will discard their Frenchness,” but this should not be taken as a sign he saw Alsatian identity as something separate from German. Instead, much of the evidence from Bismarck’s speeches and actions suggests that he perceived Alsatian-ness as a type of German identity ⁴.

The annexation not only disrupted the European balance of power, making Germany the dominant continental power but also transformed European public opinion, shifting sympathy away from Germany. When the war had begun, European public opinion heavily favored the Germans. Many Italians attempted to sign up as volunteers at the Prussian embassy in Florence. Bismarck’s demand that France surrender sovereignty over Alsace caused a dramatic shift in that sentiment in Italy, which is exemplified by the reaction of Giuseppe Garibaldi: “Yesterday I said to you: war to the death to Bonaparte. Today I say to you: rescue the French Republic by every means.” ⁵. The decision to annex Alsace-Lorraine disrupted the balance of power in Europe as Germany became the dominant power in continental Europe. The previous European disdain for France had quickly shifted to the newly formed German Empire.

Revanchism

In France, the loss of Alsace-Lorraine became a symbol of national humiliation and a rallying point for revanchism, deeply embedding a desire for revenge that would significantly influence French policy and culture in the decades leading to World War I. The term ‘Revanchism’ is a term that originated from the aftermath of the Franco-Prussian war, defined as a political policy designed to recover lost territory or status. French revanchism became a deep sense of bitterness, hatred, and demand for revenge against Germany, especially because of the loss of Alsace and Lorraine following their defeat. Paintings that emphasized the humiliation of the defeat came in high demand, such as those by Alphonse de Neuville and Albert Bettannier. Pieces such as the Lion of Belfort became not only a symbol of defiance and resistance but also regional and national hope for a future revival. Art such as this remained prevalent in French culture, and the ideas and expressions within highlight the effect of the Franco-Prussian war on the French populace.

Under German rule, Alsace-Lorraine underwent a process of Germanization, where the German language and customs were promoted over French ones, and the local administration was integrated into the broader German Empire. This included the expulsion of pro-French residents and the repression of French culture and language ⁶. Such actions only intensified the feelings of loss and injustice among the French populace.

Despite this, revanchism was not a realistic foreign policy option in the realm of the 1870’s. Conservative governments pursued cautious foreign policies, France and Germany became significant trade partners and the rapid growth in the population and economy of Germany left France increasingly far behind. J.F.V. Keiger (2001) says: “By the 1880s, Franco-German relations were relatively good.” This does not mean that the feelings of revanchism were gone, however. Georges Ernest Boulanger, a French general and politician and enormously popular public figure introduced an obsessive and almost pathological anti-German sentiment which demanded the complete destruction of Imperial Germany. On the other hand, Figures like French statesman Agénor de Gasparin argues that victory against Germany would only perpetuate the “delusional beliefs” that defeat was not a measure of long-term problems ⁷. Thus, true revenge would come not on the battlefield but through reorganization and revival. In the long term, extremist ideas died down and Revanchism became a form of nationalism that influenced internal politics rather than direct military ambitions.

Despite this, French military and diplomatic strategies were still deeply influenced by the trauma of the Franco-Prussian war and the loss of Alsace-Lorraine. The significant increase in conscription and military service numbers from 1872 onwards reflects France’s efforts to become a “nation in arms.” By 1914, France had dramatically expanded its armed forces to ensure readiness for potential conflicts. The legislation of 1872 provided for 500,000 men in service in peacetime, and 1,250,000 men if war were to break out. By 1914, the numbers were 800,000 and 3,500,000 respectively ⁸. The impact of revanchism and the threat of German hegemony set the stage for France’s alliance with Russia and later with Britain, forming the Triple Entente as a counterbalance to the growing power of Germany and the Triple Alliance. The alliances were rooted in a common recognition of the German threat, influenced by historical grievances and the desire for security against potential aggression.

World War I

As tensions in Europe escalated, the intricate system of alliances and the prevailing sense of nationalism made the continent a powder keg ready to explode. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914 provided the spark needed to ignite this powder keg, leading to a rapid declaration of war by the major powers. For France, entering World War I was influenced not only by its obligations to allies but also by the opportunity to reclaim Alsace-Lorraine and overturn the verdict of 1871. The French public and military leadership saw the conflict as a chance to right the wrongs of the past and to restore France’s honor and territorial integrity.

Throughout the war, the objective of regaining Alsace-Lorraine was a rallying cry that helped sustain national unity and morale. French generals, politicians, and wartime propaganda frequently invoked the loss of the provinces to justify the sacrifices required by the war effort. This sentiment was not confined to rhetoric; it shaped France’s military strategies and objectives, with French forces particularly focused on regions near the lost territories.

With the end of World War I and the collapse of the Second Reich into the Weimar Republic, Germany under the Versailles Treaty after 1919 ceded its periphery territories. Alsace-Lorraine was symbolically taken from Germany and given (or in their interpretation returned) to France, and subsequently divided into the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine. The reintegration of these territories, however, was not straightforward. The return was met with mixed reactions from the local populations, who had experienced significant German cultural influence and administrative policies over the past decades. When French armies entered Alsace in 1918, many of the local people greeted them with enthusiasm. In the short term, the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France was seen as liberation. In the coming years, French authorities faced challenges in assimilating the region back into France, balancing between punitive measures against perceived collaborators and efforts to restore a sense of French identity ⁹. French policy in Alsace-Lorraine faced challenges related to the relation of Church and State, the language question, and the legal code. Dissatisfaction with French rule emerged, and a small but militant minority began agitating for autonomy ⁹.

In contrast to the German expulsion of French people from the region, the French had their own efforts to ‘re-Francoicize’ Alsace-Lorraine. After World War I, Over 100,000 German civilians were expelled from Lorraine, and more than 150,000 were expelled from Alsace ¹⁰. The French expulsion campaign officially ended by 1920 after the Versailles Treaty formalized the transfer of Alsace and Lorraine to France. These figures do not include the undetermined number of Germans who fled the region due to fears of persecution, or in search of jobs elsewhere since Germans were effectively demoted to second-class status in the job market.

Interwar

The manner in which Alsace-Lorraine and Germany as a whole was treated in the peace negotiations at Versailles left a lasting impact on German national sentiment and became a point of contention in the interwar years. The harsh terms imposed on Germany, including the ‘war guilt’ clause and reparations, combined with the loss of territory, fueled a sense of injustice and humiliation that would later be exploited by nationalist and extremist factions in Germany, setting the stage for future upheavals.

The return of Alsace-Lorraine to France was emblematic of the punitive measures imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles, which included significant territorial losses, crippling reparations, and the demilitarization of the Rhineland. These terms were intended to weaken Germany and prevent future conflicts, but they also embittered many Germans, who viewed the treaty as a ‘Diktat’ imposed by victorious powers. The status of Alsace-Lorraine became a focal point of German grievances, with nationalists decrying the loss as an ongoing injustice that needed to be rectified.

Following World War I, Germany faced not only physical destruction but also a profound cultural and psychological devastation. According to Annemarie Sammartino in “The Impossible Border,” the post-war period saw Germany grappling with a shattered national identity and a fraught relationship with its borders and lost territories. As Sammartino (2010) states, “The treaties of Versailles, Trianon, and St. Germain in 1919 did not resolve the chaos created by war and revolution but, rather, added a new dimension to the crisis of sovereignty.” This sense of a broken national identity was compounded by the loss of territories like Alsace-Lorraine and the demilitarization of the Rhineland, which were seen not just as economic blows but as cultural and emotional losses. Sammartino (2010) continues to argue that the enforced new borders and the creation of ‘Auslandsdeutsche’ (Germans living outside the newly drawn borders) added layers of identity conflict and resentment, which were later manipulated by extremist factions.

The economic implications of the treaty further complicated Franco-German relations. Alsace-Lorraine was an industrial and mineral-rich region, and its loss was a significant economic blow to Germany. Meanwhile, France aimed to leverage these resources to rebuild its economy, which had been devastated by the war. Security concerns also dominated the French agenda; France was keen on maintaining control over Alsace-Lorraine not only for its symbolic importance but also as a strategic buffer against potential German aggression, especially as they remilitarized.

Beyond the retaking of Alsace-Lorraine, the Treaty of Versailles imposed severe reparations on the newly created Weimar Republic, demanding payments that far exceeded Germany’s ability to pay. This financial demand, totaling approximately 132 billion gold marks, placed an insurmountable strain on the German economy. To meet these reparations, Germany resorted to printing more money, leading to hyperinflation by the early 1920s. The value of the German mark plummeted, wiping out the savings of middle-class families and crippling the national economy. This economic devastation not only fueled political extremism but also sowed seeds of deep resentment among the German populace. The economic pressures exacerbated by the reparations were further complicated by lost industrial territories and reduced productivity, which made economic recovery nearly impossible under the crushing weight of the Treaty’s demands. These conditions destabilized the Weimar Republic, contributing to social unrest and sowing the seeds for the later rise of radical ideologies.

The memory of Alsace-Lorraine influenced not only the interwar period but also the broader trajectory of European politics. The region’s status was a constant reminder of the unresolved issues stemming from the Treaty of Versailles, contributing to the volatile political climate of the 1920s and 1930s. The rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in Germany was fueled in part by nationalist rhetoric that capitalized on public dissatisfaction with the treaty and the loss of territories like Alsace-Lorraine. This discontent played a significant role in the lead-up to World War II, as Hitler vowed to overturn the Versailles settlement and restore Germany’s former glory.

Nazi Economy

The Nazi economy, as detailed in Adam Tooze’s analysis, was marked by an aggressive rearmament policy that significantly transformed Germany’s industrial landscape. This militarization of the economy was executed at an unprecedented scale, with vast resources diverted away from civilian use to military production. As early as 1934, this shift began affecting the broader economy, leading to shortages and inflationary pressures that ultimately degraded the living standards of the German populace.

In 1935, private consumption was still 7 percent below its pre-Depression levels, and private investment was 22 percent down. By contrast, state spending was 70 percent higher than it had been in 1928, and that increase was almost entirely due to military spending ¹¹. This economic strategy, while initially boosting employment and industrial output, had catastrophic long-term effects on Germany’s economic stability. The German rearmament drive was unsustainable, leading to economic imbalances that could not be corrected without significant external expansion, which in turn necessitated aggressive foreign policy moves including the later annexation of territories like Alsace-Lorraine.

Another tool used by the Third Reich to rearm were the MEFO bills. These were essentially promissory notes used to pay armament manufacturers without direct government outlay, thus keeping the rearmament hidden and off the books to avoid international scrutiny and internal economic turmoil. From 1934 to 1938, MEFO bills worth approximately 12 billion Reichsmarks were issued, representing a significant portion of Germany’s military spending during that period ¹¹. This was a massive increase from the national debt level, which significantly rose under the Nazi regime due to this covert financing method. To give context, Germany’s national debt in 1932 was around 10 billion Reichsmarks, and by 1938, it had increased to about 30 billion Reichsmarks when including MEFO bills ¹¹. The reliance on these bills, however, contributed to the eventual financial crises faced by the Nazi regime as the war progressed. The economic distortions created by these bills, coupled with aggressive military expenditures, led to the significant economic challenges that Germany would face during and after the war.

World War II

Eventually, the nationalistic drive and economic necessity to expand their territory boiled over and the Third Reich invaded Poland on September 1st, 1939, marking the beginning of World War II. In the early stages of World War II, following their swift and decisive victories in Western Europe, Nazi Germany re-annexed Alsace-Lorraine, reintegrating the region into the Reich. The annexation was marked by a brutal policy of Germanization, which sought to eradicate French influence and fully assimilate the region into Nazi Germany. This included the imposition of German laws, the expulsion of Jewish residents, the drafting of local men into the Wehrmacht, and the suppression of French language and culture. The Nazi administration aimed to permanently secure Alsace-Lorraine as part of Germany, reinforcing their belief in the region’s inherent ‘German-ness.’

The liberation of Alsace-Lorraine came towards the end of World War II as Allied forces advanced into German-occupied territory. The battles for these regions were intense and destructive, with significant civilian and military casualties. Upon liberation, there was an immediate effort by the restored French government to reintegrate Alsace-Lorraine fully into France. This process was complex, involving not only physical rebuilding but also reconciling the diverse political and social views of the local population, many of whom had experienced severe wartime traumas and displacement.

Aftermath of World War II

World War II left Germany in ruins, with its cities bombed, its infrastructure shattered, and its population demoralized. Within its 1937 borders, Germany saw more than 8 percent of its prewar population perish during the conflict ¹². According to Werrell (1986), 4.8 million housing units were destroyed, leaving 13 million Germans homeless. Over 70 percent of the largest cities had their urban core destroyed. In East Germany, 9.4 percent of pre-war housing was destroyed, while in West Germany the figure was 18.5 percent. As a result of all of this, there was 400 million cubic meters of rubble to clear ¹³. Everything had to be rebuilt from the ground up. The war’s end saw the country divided into occupation zones by the Allied powers, setting the stage for this long and difficult reconstruction process. The destruction was not just physical but also moral, as the full extend of the Nazi atrocities, including the Holocaust, came to light. This period of devastation forced Germany to confront its recent past and rethink its future role in international politics.

The post-war status of Alsace-Lorraine was firmly established as an integral part of the French Republic, with its unique local laws and administrative practices that acknowledge its distinct history and Germanic influences. The region’s final status was symbolically and legally cemented into the democratic framework of the post-war European order, aimed at preventing future conflicts over the territory.

In the aftermath of World War II, Germany faced the monumental task of rebuilding its society, economy, and international reputation. The Nuremberg Trials and other denazification efforts were initial steps towards reckoning with the crimes of the Nazi regime. The experiences of regions like Alsace-Lorraine underscored the need for a new approach to European relations. This led to initiatives aimed at creating a more integrated and peaceful Europe. The formation of the European Coal and Steel Community, which later evolved into the European Economic Community, and eventually the European Union, was partly motivated by the desire to prevent future conflicts by tying national economies together. This globalization along with the growing technological power of weapons and their ability to destroy has made war extremely economically damaging.

Today, Germany stands as a leading economy in Europe and a key player in the EU. Its role in Europe is largely defined by its commitment to the principles of cooperation, human rights, and economic stability—principles shaped by the harsh lessons of its past. Contemporary Germany takes a reflective view of its historical decisions, including the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine. There is a broad consensus in German society and politics that the mistakes of the past must guide present actions, particularly regarding nationalism and territorial aggression.

Conclusion

The annexation of Alsace-Lorraine exemplifies how short-term gains can lead to long-term geopolitical consequences. The events that followed illustrate the dangers of aggressive nationalism and the importance of stable, peaceful borders. Alongside this point, Germany’s evolution from a nation responsible for tremendous destruction to a pillar of European stability and integration demonstrates the transformative power of confronting one’s history and committing to a path of reconciliation and cooperation.