Chris Boonzaier Posted March 15, 2015 Posted March 15, 2015 Hi, I have always assumed the Regimentskommandeur is the commander, and Regiments Führer has Temporary command... But looking at award documets to the 1 garde zu Fuss i see all the commanders are listed as "Führer".... even after a couple of years at the helm.According to Wiki... All Princes of Prussia were commissioned lieutenants in the 1st Foot Guards upon their tenth birthdays. Regimentschef was always the King of Prussia.Can we assume that they are all listed as "Führer" because the Koenig is actually the Kommandeur, even if not there?ThanksChris
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 15, 2015 Author Posted March 15, 2015 1 August 1914: Eitel Friedrich Prince of Prussia14 November 1914 Friedrich von Bismarck (killed at Bouvincourt, acting commander)6 November 1916: Siegfried Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken (acting commander)28 April 1917: (ad interim) Friedrich Franz Adolf von Stephani (acting commander)7 July 1917 – 11 December 1918: Siegfried Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken (acting commander)27 August 1918: (ad interim) Friedrich Franz Adolf von Stephani (acting commander)1 September – 11 December 1918: Siegfried Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken (acting commander)26 September 1918: (ad interim) Friedrich Franz Adolf von Stephani (acting commander)30 September – 11 December 1918: Siegfried Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken (acting commander)As you see on the WIKI page for the Regiment.... Eitel Friedrich was Kommander.... then everyone else afterwards just Acting Commander or Führer
Bernhard H.Holst Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Hello Chris.I believe that there existed a substantial difference in the unit commanders titles' application during WW I and WWII. In my opinion the title of commander ( Kommandeur) and Leader ( Fuehrer) was used interchangeably. Graf Eulenburg was in fact the regimental commander of 1.Garde Regiment z. F. for the longest duration as a regimental commander and has been lauded as such in historians' evaluation. Looking at the several unit histories of WW I most often the "Fuehrer " title was used and I believe not to establish or signal a temporary command or as deputy. The honorary " Regiments Chef" or "Inhaber" was traditional and even assumed by females.During WW II existed such a slew of different command situations that scorecards would be helpful ( Stellvertreter, m.d.F.d.G. i.V and what have you.)Bernhard H. Holst
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 16, 2015 Author Posted March 16, 2015 Hi,It is however somehow auffällig with this regiment.... Führer is always the exceptions when it comes to the signatures on regimental level issued award documents. in those cases research often shows a temp command. BestChris
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 16, 2015 Author Posted March 16, 2015 Just found the following on the Regt, " Von Bismarck und später Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken erhielten in der Ernennungsurkunde die Bezeichnung „Regimentsführer“, da ja der Prinz nach dem Krieg wieder der Regimentskommandeur werden wollte."
Bernhard H.Holst Posted March 16, 2015 Posted March 16, 2015 Just found the following on the Regt, " Von Bismarck und später Graf zu Eulenburg-Wicken erhielten in der Ernennungsurkunde die Bezeichnung „Regimentsführer“, da ja der Prinz nach dem Krieg wieder der Regimentskommandeur werden wollte."Hello Chris.Interesting information. The prince Eitel Friedrich , I wonder why he gave up command. But note the other meaning of the word " eitel".Bernhard H. Holst
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 16, 2015 Author Posted March 16, 2015 Hi, he took over the Division... I suppose he wanted to have his cake and eat it...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now