D O C U M E N T 2 2 2 J U N E 1 9 2 2 3 3 9
TLS. [43 515]. The letter is addressed “Herrn Professor Albert Einstein.” There are perforations for
a loose-leaf binder at the left margin of the document.
[1]For Einstein’s account of his conversation with Aulard in Paris, see Doc. 170.
[2]The public controversy between Delbrück and Aulard began in early 1922 following Delbrück’s
refusal to sign a joint manifesto “for democracy and peace” by the Ligue française pour la défense
des droits de l’homme et du citoyen and the Bund “Neues Vaterland,” which declared that “Germany
should acknowledge not only a legal but also a moral obligation that it had to redress the damage
caused by its attack against France” (“Deutschland solle nicht nur als eine juristische, sondern als eine
moralische Pflicht anerkennen, daß es den Schaden gutmachen müsse, welcher durch seinen Angriff
gegen Frankreich entstanden sei”; Mitteilungsblatt der Arbeitsausschusses deutscher Verbände
[1. Aprilheft 1922], 2, 7, p. 1).
In his article of 25 May, Delbrück responded to Aulard’s article in Dépeche de Toulouse of
15 April and discussed various issues related to the question of who was responsible for the outbreak
of World War I (see Berliner Tageblatt, 25 May 1922, Morning Edition). In an addendum, Delbrück
also responded to Aulard’s article in Revue de Paris of 1 May, in which Aulard had insisted that the
dispatch of 31 July 1914 from the German chancellor to the German ambassador in Paris, Wilhelm
von Schoen (1886–1960), in which he instructed Schoen to ask the French to remain neutral if Ger-
many and Russia went to war, was a forgery. In his addendum, Delbrück presented evidence belying
Aulard’s claim (see Berliner Tageblatt, 28 May 1922, Morning Edition).
[3]Von Schoen’s article, “Die französische Revanchepolitik,” was published in 1923 in Ziegler
1923, pp. 16–29. He essentially argues that the nationalist revanchist attitudes and actions of Ray-
mond Poíncaré and of his newly appointed ministers and ambassadors were substiantially responsible
for creating a belligerent atmosphere that facilitated, if not ushered, the outbreak of war.
[4]Victor Basch (1863–1944) was Professor of German Studies and Philosophy at the Sorbonne
and a member of the Ligue française pour la défense des droits de l’homme et du citoyen.
[5]Raymond Poincaré (1860–1934), Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of France.
[6]Gerlach had protested against the acquittal of Nikolaus Cossmann, the editor of the Süddeutsche
Monatshefte, who had been accused of slander by Felix Fechenbach, the former secretary of revolu-
tionary leader Kurt Eisner, over his role in the alleged forgery of a central document pertaining to the
“war guilt” of the German government in World War I (see Die Welt am Montag, 15 May 1922, and
Geyer 1998, pp. 291–292). In reaction, Delbrück accused Gerlach of writing an article “whose factual
claims were for all intents and purposes utterly untrue” (“an dessen tatsächlichen Behauptungen
sozusagen kein wahres Wort war”; see Delbrück1922 ).
[7]The meeting that Einstein was to address on 11 June (see Doc. 218).
[8]Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt.
[9]This passage is in Delbrück’s hand.
222. From Henry S. Hatfield[1]
Berlin. Kurfürstenstr; 124, 7 Juni 1922
Hoch verehrter Herr Professor!
Auf Dr. Freundlichs
Ermunterung[2]
wage ich es, Ihnen beiliegende Beschrei-
bung einiger Gedanken über Kristall-Struktur zuzusenden, mit der Bitte um Ihre
Urteil, ob Sinn oder Unsinn vorliegt. Ich bin leider mathematisch so schlecht ge-
schult dass ich nicht in der Lage bin, die Grundhypothese auf ihre Richtigkeit
streng zu prüfen; aber wenn Sie meinen, dass die Ideen wertvoll und neu sind, so
werde ich trachten, weiter zu kommen.
Previous Page Next Page