The stab-in-the-back legend - a deliberately constructed falsification of history

The historian Arne Karsten on a sensational defamation trial

Why did the Germans lose the war in 1918? A defamation trial between two editors sought to clarify this question in 1925. Why did this Munich stab-in-the-back trial, which lasted from 19 October to 20 November 1925, come about at all?

Arne Karsten: Because the editor of the social-democratic "Münchner Post", Martin Gruber, sued the editor of the "Süddeutsche Monatshefte" in Munich, Paul Nicolaus Cossmann, who systematically falsified history in a whole series of issues in the summer of 1924 with a view to the Reichstag elections, that the German army had lost the war in 1918, not because it had been militarily defeated by the enemy, but because an unholy alliance of Social Democrats, anarchists and Jews had drained the defence force from within and thus destroyed the morale of the troops, who were undefeated in the "field", through betrayal and internal activities.

What does the term "stab in the back" mean in this context?

Arne Karsten: It simply means the stab in the back, insidiously carried out by traitors.

Hundreds of witnesses were heard in this trial. Where did they come from?

Arne Karsten : The witnesses came from all areas, from the military, politics and business, in line with the importance of this issue for the Germans' self-image. It was all about taking stock of why the war was lost.

Although the stab-in-the-back legend was factually refuted, the editor of the Social Democratic daily newspaper Münchener Post, Martin Gruber (1866 - 1936), was nevertheless fined 3,000 Reichsmarks. Why?

Arne Karsten: Because Mr Cossmann's defence lawyer succeeded in presenting the misinterpretation of historical events as a mistaken belief, not as wilful intent. That was a legal move that led to this turn of events.

The controversial question of the causes of the military defeat in the First World War could not be clarified in the trial, could it?

Arne Karsten: Yes and no. Such a big question is difficult to clarify anyway. On the other hand, there was nothing to clarify. In March 1918, before the last major German offensive in the West, the later, short-term Reich Chancellor Max von Baden asked the head of the Supreme Army Command Erich Ludendorff: "What happens if things go wrong?" In response, Ludendorff said: "Then Germany will just have to perish." The failure of the spring offensive in 1918 basically made the leading military officers realise that the war was lost. What followed was a long guilty agony, because after a whole series of failed offensives, collapse was imminent. That was the historical reality. But historical truth always has a hard time when political interests come into play. For the Germans, of course, it was more convenient to deny the defeat. The image of the enemy at home - "the left, the social democrats have betrayed us!" - is something that could be used as a political instrument in election campaigns.

What effect did the stab-in-the-back legend have in the Third Reich?

Arne Karsten : It became one of the fundamental myths, so to speak, of this system based on the mythical falsification of history, incorporated into an interpretation of the world that clearly stylised an enemy scheme based on political considerations.

Today, the significance of the stab-in-the-back legend can be seen above all in the fact that it serves as an example of the instrumentalisation of conspiracy myths for political destabilisation. The allegations of electoral fraud in connection with the 2020 US presidential election could be cited as a modern example, couldn't it?

Arne Karsten: Modern mass societies, regardless of their orientation, generally cannot do without myths that can be used to mobilise majorities. Sociologists have recognised this for a long time. There is always and everywhere a danger that such myths will be instrumentalised in a way that is contrary to the truth. This will never change.

Uwe Blass

PD Dr Arne Karsten (*1969) studied art history, history and philosophy in Göttingen, Rome and Berlin. From 2001 to 2009, he was a research assistant at the Institute for Art and Visual History at Humboldt University Berlin. He has been teaching as a junior professor since the 2009 winter semester and as a private lecturer in modern history at the University of Wuppertal since his habilitation in 2016.