Universitätsarchiv Stuttgart Findbuch zum Bestand 33 Forschungs- und Materialprüfungsanstalt für das Bauwesen (FMPA) - Otto-Graf-Institut Edited by Dr. Volker Ziegler With the cooperation of Hanna Reiss, Tamara Zukakishvili, Stephanie Hengel, Maria Stemper, Simone Wittmann, Anna Bittigkoffer, Norbert Becker Supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Stuttgart 2012 Table of contents 1st foreword 2. 2.1 The founding of the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart 2.2 Carl Bach and Emil Mörsch 2.3 The beginnings of Otto Graf in the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart 2.4 Otto Graf, Richard Baumann and the successor of Carl Bach 2.5 The formation of the Department of Civil Engineering and the Institute for Building Materials Research and Testing in Civil Engineering 2.6 Otto Graf after the Second World War 2.7 Otto Graf's Services 2.8 Relocation of the FMPA to Vaihingen 2.9 Restructuring within the FMPA 2.10 Re-sorting the FMPA to the Ministry of Economics of Baden-Württemberg 2.11 Reintegration of the FMPA into the University of Stuttgart and Reunification with the MPA 3. 3.1 Inventory History 3.2 Filing and Registration 3.3 Distribution density 3.4 Focus on content 4 Literature 5. Reference to further archive holdings 6. User notes 1. Foreword In 1999 and 2000, the University Archive Stuttgart took over a large number of old files from the central institute building of the then Research and Material Testing Institute Baden-Württemberg (FMPA) - Otto-Graf-Institut, a total of 263.7 shelf metres. This extensive collection, together with a few smaller, later additions, forms the holdings 33, which the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) funded from June 2008 to March 2012 as part of the Scientific Library Services and Information Systems (LIS) funding programme. The focus of the cataloguing lies on the research organization and on the networks in NS large-scale projects and in construction projects of the early Federal Republic of Germany, which also corresponds to the density of the inventory handed down between 1933 and 1958. The Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart officially commenced its activities on 25 February 1884. It was an institution of the Technical University of Stuttgart. From the beginning, both areas were covered: material testing for mechanical and plant engineering as well as the testing of building materials and construction methods. When in 1927 the institutional separation of the two areas of work was initiated, the registries of the Material Testing Institute/MPA (Mechanical Engineering) and the Material Testing Institute for Construction were also separated. When the latter moved from Stuttgart-Berg to the new buildings in Stuttgart-Vaihingen at the end of the 1950s and beginning of the 1960s, the files were taken along for building material testing, but also the series of joint outgoing mail books from 1883. They are therefore also part of the archive holdings 33. Following the retirement of non-archival-worthy files, the archive holdings currently comprise 3,484 archive units from the period from 1883 to 1996 as well as 777 personnel files of FMPA employees up to 1986. A finding aid book is also available online for the personnel files of employees born up to 1912. A whole series of employees of the Stuttgart University Archive were involved in the implementation of the project. The project staff members Hanna Reiss, Tamara Zukakishvili and Stephanie Hengel must first be named here. Hanna Reiss recorded the personnel files and the important clients, in addition she supported the scientific coworker with evaluation questions. Tamara Zukakishvili recorded the daily copies of the departments of the Otto-Graf-Institut. Stephanie Hengel, together with the undersigned, carried out the evaluation of the partial stock of publications and recorded and systematised, among other things, the extensive partial stock of the Länder Expert Committee for New Building Materials and Types of Construction. Maria Stemper registered the outgoing mail correspondence, Simone Wittmann, Anna Bittigkoffer and Norbert Becker a part of the test files of the departments concrete, stones and binders, earth and foundation engineering and building physics. Norbert Becker, Anna Bittigkoffer and Stephanie Hengel carried out the inspection and evaluation of the large-format documents and plans as well as the extensive collection of photographs and photonegatives. Rolf Peter Menger took over important de-icing and packaging work and Norbert Becker, head of the University Archive in Stuttgart, provided advice and support on all important issues. Once again we would like to thank all those involved in the implementation of the project. Stuttgart, 12.03.2012 Dr. Volker Ziegler 2nd outline of the history of building material testing at the Technical University/University of Stuttgart 2.1 The foundation of the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart The present volume 33 contains the files of the working area of building material testing, which was part of the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart under various names until 1945 and only then became independent, which is why it is necessary to go into the history of the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart in more detail. The Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart officially commenced its activities on 25 February 1884. Professor Adolf Groß, Professor of Machine Drawing, Machine Science and Design Exercises at the Stuttgart Polytechnic, was the founding director. In September 1883, however, Groß changed from the Polytechnikum Stuttgart to the board of directors of the Württembergische Staatseisenbahnen and was replaced by Carl Bach[1] as the board member of the Materialprüfungsanstalt[2] In the decree of the Department of Churches and Education in the Staatsanzeiger für Württemberg of 21 February 1884, the following is formulated as the area of responsibility of the Materialprüfungsanstalt Stuttgart: 1. The Materialprüfungsanstalt is determined to serve the interests of industry as well as those of teaching. Initially, the equipment was purchased to determine the tensile strength of metal and wooden rods, belts, ropes, cement and cement mortar, the compressive strength of cement, cement mortar and bricks, the bending strength of metal rods and beams, the shear strength of round metal rods. On request, elasticity modulus and proportional limit, if any, can also be determined during tensile tests. It has been decided to extend the institution by the facilities for determining the wear and tear of stones. The fees payable for the use of the establishment shall be sufficient to cover its expenses. Public operation will begin on 25 February this year. This shows that building material tests were planned from the outset and that the institution was to be operated economically. The Royal Württemberg Ministry of Finance provided an amount of 6,000 Marks. Furthermore, 10,000 Marks came from a surplus that had been achieved at the state trade exhibition in Stuttgart at that time. This was what the Württembergische Bezirksverein Deutscher Ingenieure (Württemberg District Association of German Engineers) had advocated following an application by Carl Bach.[3] There was no state funding. Carl Bach therefore had to make do with a room in the main building of the polytechnic, which had to be shared with the electrical engineering department. Apart from Carl Bach, there was only one employee at the beginning. It was not until 1906 that a new building could be moved into in Stuttgart-Berg. The development had been so positive that the state of Württemberg assumed the construction costs and Carl Bach was able to hire additional personnel, including engineers Richard Baumann, Otto Graf and Max Ulrich, who came to the Materials Testing Institute in 1903 and 1904. They were largely paid for out of earned funds. 2.2 Carl Bach and Emil Mörsch Carl Bach's collaboration with Emil Mörsch, a man who laid the scientific foundations for reinforced concrete construction, was of fundamental importance. In 1902 Mörsch published his work Der Eisenbetonbau, seine Anwendung und Theorie. This book was published in a short time and became a standard work. Mörsch, who was still working for Ways at that time.

The file delivery of the Central Office for Trade and Commerce in Stuttgart. Von Walter Grube: The Königlich Württembergische Zentralstelle für Gewerbe und Handel (Royal Württemberg Central Office for Trade and Commerce) has assumed a particularly prestigious position among the authorities that the German states created for their economic administration in the 19th century. It originated as a state college under the Ministry of the Interior in the same revolutionary year of 1848, in which Prussia, Austria and Bavaria established special trade ministries; the notoriously thrifty Württemberg did not know its own ministry for economic affairs until the end of the monarchy, as Baden had in its trade ministry in 1860-1881. Nevertheless, the "Central Office", above all under the leadership of the great Ferdinand von Steinbeis (1856-1880), was successful in economic policy, which, in addition to the achievements of the ministries of trade and commerce of other countries, was quite impressive. It was thanks to the work of the Central Office that Württemberg, which was poor in raw materials, technically still lagging behind, and had unfavorable transport connections, soon became the actual state of state trade promotion, from which people for a long time tried eagerly to learn, not only in Germany. The Central Office played a decisive role in the restructuring of the Württemberg economic structure in the age of the Industrial Revolution. The historian of her first heyday in 1875 has divided her versatile field of activity into the following groups: 1. "Consultative services" in legislative and administrative matters: trade, customs, trade, banking and building legislation, coinage, measure and weight, commercial security police, iron and salt extraction, transport, taxation and more.a.; 2. teaching activities: trade schools, travelling teachers, trade training workshops, model and teaching material collection, trade model store, library, journalistic work, associations; 3. "Direct influence on commercial activity": markets, trade fairs, stock exchanges, exports, foreign commercial agencies; 4. direct influence on commercial activity": support with capital and technical suggestions for all branches of industry; 5. regimental activity" mainly as a state patent office, state exhibition commission, central authority for chambers of commerce and industry, state calibration authority and in the administration of commercial foundations. Among these activities, in the country conscious of its school tradition, "instructive work" has always rightly been regarded as a special glorious page of the Central Office; the Protestant Prelate Merz once called it a "jewel of Württemberg". Not least due to the educational work of the central office and the commission for the commercial further training schools founded in 1853, a down-to-earth tribe of recognised skilled workers grew from day labourers, small farmers' and vineyard gardeners' sons, from guilt-bound master craftsmen and a poorly developed trading class of that highly qualified entrepreneurship which, in addition to the broad stratum of vital small and medium-sized enterprises characteristic of Württemberg, has created many a company of world renown. The far-sighted way in which the Central Office, overcoming some resistance, drove trade promotion and economic policy in general at that time was still noticeable in its effects up to the crisis resistance of the Württemberg economy, which was widespread and much envied in the thirties of our century.After the state revolution of 1918 had also given Württemberg its own ministries for the economy (Labour Ministry and Food Ministry, 1926 united to form the Economics Ministry), the Central Office for Trade and Commerce was reorganised by decree of the State Ministry of 30 November 1920 under new distribution of responsibilities to the State Trade Office. For the organization of the state economic administration, this was not as revolutionary as the founding of the Central Office, with which a completely new epoch of Württemberg industrial history had begun. But the reorganization was more far-reaching than the repeated renewal of the "Basic Provisions" of 1848, through which the Central Office had repeatedly adapted itself to the changes in economic life and in the relationship between the state and the economy in the course of its seventy-year history. The Central Office, the creation of the revolution of 1848, thus underwent its strongest transformation to date through the revolution of 1918. As one can easily understand, the precipitation of files from the Central Office represents a unique source in the state sector for the economic history of Württemberg in the years 1848-1920. In addition, the Central Office had taken over not inconsiderable files of older semi-private institutions founded or sponsored by the state, such as the "Gesellschaft für Beförderung der Gewerbe" (Society for the Promotion of Trade) founded in 1830 and the "Handels- und Gewerbsverein" (Trade and Trade Association) founded in 1819, and later partly also the "Zentralstelle des landwirtschaftlichen Vereins" (Central Office of the Agricultural Association) established in 1817. The registry of the Stuttgart Central Office for Trade and Commerce in 1920, when it was transformed into the State Trade Office, contained the relevant records of a full century. The Central Office, like the majority of the 19th century ministries and state resource authorities, has not exercised little care in its registry. The first registry plan of the newly founded authority, which was first provisionally housed in the building of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was drafted in 1850 by Reinhardt's secretary, a booklet of only 37 pages; it remained in force throughout the Steinbeis era until the early eighties. The files taken over immediately in 1848 by the Gewerbeförderungsgesellschaft and the Handels- und Gewerbeverein were incorporated into the individual departments of the registry in 1850. The same procedure was followed when, in 1882, on the occasion of the reorganization of the registry of the Central Office for Agriculture, the previous files of the Central Office of the Agricultural Association had been handed over to the association, as well as again in 1888, when papers from the estate of the well-known national economist Moriz Mohl were handed over to the association. In 1869 a separate room had to be set up for the registry, which until then had been housed in the only chancellery room, and the three "full-grafted" file shelves had to be increased by two new ones. In 1883, not long after the Director (and later President) Robert von Gupp took office, a fundamental reorganization of the further swollen registry overflowing into the corridors and attic had become indispensable. The work was transferred by the Ministry of the Interior to the civil servant Heberle of the Oberamt Schwäbisch Hall, since it could not be handled by the few civil servants of the central office, and was only completed after three years. The new registry plan drawn up by Heberle, now already a volume of 200 pages, has been preserved, while his repertory, four times as extensive, unfortunately did not come to us. For the first time, Heberle systematically separated the current registry (then 1109 fascicles) from the old registry (then 1242 fascicles). On the occasion of these works also the first file cassations of considerable size took place (about 180 fascicles and volumes). The surviving elimination lists show that this was done conscientiously and that there was probably very little collected, which would be of interest to the economic historian today. The order created in 1883-85 has survived the relocation of the central office to the new magnificent building of the Stuttgart State Trade Museum in 1896; even today, a large part of the files can be found in the fascicles formed and inscribed by Heberle. In the new building, in 1901-1902, the old registry, which had already grown into a proper official archive, could be separated and appropriately furnished in the attic. In 1905-1908, Obersekretär Hauser produced a new file plan of 800 pages for old and current registries, using but also improving the Heberleschen order, which was in use until the reorganization of the Central Office in 1920 and has fortunately been preserved. The fact that substantial parts of it then fell victim to the bombs of the Second World War is one of the most sensitive source losses for research. All files of the Central Office, which had been sent to the Ministry of Economy by the State Trade Office in the wake of the organisational changes of 1920, were burnt with the Ministry of Economy, including valuable files on chambers of commerce, trade contracts and customs 1819-1870 as well as on railways 1857-1913. Apart from the ruinous remains, all files of the Central Office that were still in the possession of the Stuttgart State Trade Office during the Second World War have also been destroyed, including not only extensive material from the first two decades of the 20th century, which was still curious at the time, but also some departments dating back a long way, some of which still had files from the "Gesellschaft für Beförderung der Gewerbe" (1830-1848) and its predecessors. These were once two larger deliveries by the Stuttgart State Trade Office from 1930 and 1939, a total of about 40 m (today inventory E 170), and the files of the Patent Commission of the Central Office, which were handed over by the Reich Patent Office in 1939 and which, according to the German Patent Law of 25 January 1877, were not available for inspection. The first volume was sent to Berlin in May 1877 (Reichsgesetzblatt pp. 501ff.) (11 m, today stock E 170a), and finally 60 volumes of invoices from the Zentralstelle (1848/49-1908/09, 2 m), which the Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg had taken over in 1921 with the invoice section of the former Finanzarchiv (today stock E 224a). The existing registry aids, administrative repertories, handover and elimination directories no longer allow even a rough percentage to be given today of how the volume of this rescued document (a total of 53 linear metres) relates to that of the lost document. But on the basis of Hauser's file plan of the Central Office from 1905-1908 at least the larger and for research most perceptible gaps in the inventory handed down to us can be determined. For example, most of the minutes of the meetings are missing, the files on the well-known Stuttgart State Trade Museum (the second oldest in Europe) and those on the Information Centre for the Construction Industry; in addition to the diaries, the once demonstrably existing files on the large library of the Central Office - the most important of Germany's trade libraries -, on social insurance, industrial legal protection, building legislation, traffic with foodstuffs, luxury foods and utensils have been completely lost. Despite these and other gaps, the preserved files of the Central Office and its predecessors still represent an invaluable source for the economic history of the Württemberg royal period. It is well known that the records of the commercial enterprises, most of which grew out of small businesses, are often extremely incomplete and not easily accessible for general use; the valuable archives of the Stuttgart and Ulm Chambers of Commerce were almost completely destroyed by the Second World War. The central tradition of state industrial promotion thus offers not only the only opportunity to explore the great transformation process of the 19th century as a whole; it is also widely the only source both of the history of hundreds of individual enterprises and of the emergence of economic self-government. This source was already not completely unused. But for a long time, the partially quite inadequate degree of their development prohibited the real exploitation of them. Only the annual accounts of the Central Office (in inventory E 224a) did not require any special expenditure for archival finding aids. In chronological order, you will find detailed evidence of all measures for industrial education and support for trade, of each "sending experts abroad and appointing tradesmen from the same field" (as one of the invoice headings reads), of the purchase of models, drawings, samples, sample tools, machines and inventions, of exhibitions and prize distributions, of the introduction of new branches of industry and the upgrading of existing ones, of the promotion of the sale of goods, of trade associations and craftsmen, and finally of expenditure on fundamental studies of industrial development. Anyone looking for individual companies or persons in the accounts must of course, in order to reach their goal quickly, already be aware of the vintages in question, and must also be content with the fact that 19th century accounts, less informative than some from earlier times, essentially give facts and only rarely motives.In 1949, the State Archives Ludwigsburg was able to complete a hand-written archive repertory for the patent files of the Central Office (fonds E 170a), which had been taken over in 1939 without any index, during the executive board of the then Oberarchivrat Dr. Max Miller. In two volumes (with together more than 1000 pages) it lists the protocols of the patent commission and some general files as well as the chronologically arranged special files on all Württemberg patents examined by the central office in the years 1848-1877 (with name index). In addition, for the years 1841 to 1848, it makes accessible the relevant preparatory files of the Central Office of the Agricultural Association, which was responsible for the patent system at that time, characteristic of the Biedermeier view of commercial economy. The collection, easily accessible since 1949 (a total of 2373 tufts), contains patent files of Swabian inventors (e.g. Daimler, Max Eyth, Magirus, Gebrüder Mauser and Friedrich Voith) as well as numerous patent applications of non-Württembergians (from the rest of Germany, from other European countries and from America), all in all quite considerable documents for the history of technology. It proved to be more difficult for the archive administration to catalog the even more important and far more extensive file deliveries of the Landesgewerbeamt of 1930 and 1939, the first of which is already listed in K.O. Müller's printed "Gesamübersicht" of 1937 (fonds E 170). In the research service of the State Archives, especially since the Second World War, there have been repeated attempts to use these files for surveys of company histories and anniversaries. But the scarcity of the summary handover lists made this an always time-consuming and often unsuccessful effort. Even the question of individual facts and data could embarrass the archivist; there was absolutely no question of a systematic evaluation of the holdings for the economic and social history, which is becoming more and more important from year to year. Paul Gehring's important essays on Württemberg economic history in the 19th century had to be written without the use of these files, especially under the difficult working conditions of the war and post-war years. Under these circumstances, the production of a scientifically useful repertory became an urgent desideratum of both administration and research. Fortunately, in 1958, the efforts of State Archives Director Dr. Max Miller to obtain funds from the State Trade Office of Baden-Württemberg for the temporary employment of a legally and economically trained processor of these trade and commercial files were successful. The typewritten repertory E 170 comprises three state folio volumes of almost 1000 pages and, restored according to the Hauser file plan from 1905-1908, makes the holdings usable right down to their finest ramifications. Some of it certainly is of predominantly regional or even only local historical interest. But much of it shows in surprisingly rich detail how systematically the Central Office used the experiences and models of the then technically and socially advanced German and non-German states (above all Belgium and England) to raise the Württemberg economy. There are numerous files on the secondment of entrepreneurs, technicians and craftsmen abroad for technical and artistic training, on experiments with foreign machines and production processes, on the appointment of foreign specialists, on participation in major international exhibitions from Paris and London to Philadelphia and Melbourne. Thus, the collection of files shows the way in which a 19th-century German middle-class state developed its craft with comparatively modest but skilfully invested financial expenditures and helped its industry to become internationally competitive. At the goal of this way stood, that was the specifically Württemberg of a gemeindeutschen procedure per se, a quality industry of large variety and healthy decentralization. The typewritten finding aid was provided by Rudolf Denk, Walter Grube and Wolfgang Schmierer (completion 1969). Note: This finding aid book is a repertory which has been available only in typewritten form up to now and which has been converted into a database-supported and thus online-capable format according to a procedure developed by the "Working Group on Retroconversion in the State Archives Ludwigsburg". This can lead to a certain discrepancy between the modern external appearance and the today partly outdated design and wording of the title records, in particular:- corrections, deletions and supplements were checked and incorporated.- The title records of archive units found to be missing were taken over and provided with a corresponding note ("Missing since ...." or similar).- If the allocation of new order numbers was unavoidable, the old signature was verified in the respective title record and in a separate overall concordance.

Contains: Top views of three (presumable) infantry works Cross sectional drawings in addition further top views and cross sectional drawings Drawings of wire obstacles Chinese characters

History of Tradition Dr. Ernst von Scheurlen, retired Ministerialrat, did not leave any testamentary disposition over the documents. Since 1945 at the latest, these had been in the house of his oldest daughter Katharina Schmidt, née Scheurlen, who, after her death on 3 January 1989, took over her son Karl Schmidt, a retired pastor. There - in the spirit of Ernst von Scheurlen - they were accessible to all relatives and were occasionally inspected by individuals. For the transfer to the Main State Archives in Stuttgart, the consideration that there would be no comparable place of secure storage in the relatives in the future was decisive. As a result, a deposit agreement was concluded between Mr Karl Schmidt and the Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg on 1 December 2008. Content and Evaluation Karl Scheurlen ( 1824, 1872) Karl Scheurlen was born on 3 Sept. 1824 in Tübingen, where his father Karl Christian Friedrich Scheurlen was professor of law. He attended school there and in Stuttgart, where his father had been appointed to the Obertribunal in 1839. He studied law in Tübingen from 1841 to 1846 and then completed his legal clerkship. In 1847 he became court actuary at the Heilbronn Higher District Court. During the revolutionary events of 1848, Karl Scheurlen adopted an emphatically conservative attitude. In 1850 he was appointed public prosecutor in Esslingen. In 1851 he was appointed Assessor of Justice and Public Prosecutor in Ellwangen, where he married Katharina Pfreundt in 1852. From 1856 on Karl Scheurlen was chief magistrate in Mergentheim, from 1863 chief justice councillor in Esslingen and from 1865 lecturing councillor in the Ministry of Justice. Together with his friend, the then Obertribunalrat von Mittnacht, Karl Scheurlen was commissioned by the Minister of Justice of Neurath to work out the principles of a judicial reform which Mittnacht, since 1867 Minister of Justice, completed in 1868 and 1869. Karl Scheurlen's ascent had also continued in 1867 with his appointment to the Privy Council; however, his two attempts to acquire a Landtag mandate failed. By decree of 23 March 1870, Karl Scheurlen was appointed head of the Department of Home Affairs and Minister of the Interior on 17 July of the same year. This appointment took place at the time of a domestic political crisis: 45 members of the Württemberg state parliament had refused in the spring to approve the military budget, the rejection of which would have made Württemberg meet its obligations from the 1866 Protection and Defense Alliance with Prussia, which was widely unpopular. The fact that the broad resistance against the military budget unexpectedly subsided can be traced back to the French declaration of war of 15 July 1870. After the new elections of 1871, which were announced with reference to the political reorganization of Germany after the Franco-German War, Karl Scheurlen found himself faced with a well-meaning majority among the members of parliament. He himself was also elected as a deputy twice, in Gaildorf and Künzelsau; he accepted the election in Gaildorf. His death on April 1, 1872, caused by a heart condition, came as a surprise. Karl Scheurlen cultivated lively literary and artistic interests in addition to his work in justice and politics. He wrote numerous verses and poems. His talent for drawing is particularly remarkable; he used it, among other things, to make numerous sketches of accused persons and judicial officials during his time at court, or to illustrate the "Amtspflege", the organ of the Hauffei, his Tübingen student fraternity. Many of his drawings have a humorous character; self-portraits and depictions of family members and acquaintances are extremely frequent. Ernst von Scheurlen ( 1863, 1952) Ernst von Scheurlen was born in Mergentheim on Feb. 5, 1863, the youngest of six children of the later Minister of the Interior, Karl Scheurlen, and his wife Katharina Scheurlen. After school he studied medicine in Berlin, where he received his doctorate in 1885. After his state examination from 1887 to 1891, he worked there as an assistant doctor at the Charité and the Reich Health Office; bacteriology and hygiene were already the focal points of his scientific interest at this time. The marriage to Sophie von Möller (1889), who belonged to a family of German descent from the then Russian Narwa, also took place during this period. In 1893 Ernst von Scheurlen became a battalion doctor in Strasbourg. At the same time he taught hygiene and bacteriology at the Technical University in Stuttgart and at the University of Strasbourg in 1893-1894 and 1895-1897 respectively. He also headed the hygiene and bacteriology department of the large garrison hospital in Stuttgart. In 1897 he took up a position as a medical councillor at the Königlich Württembergischen Medizinalkollegium. His tasks included working for the State Insurance Institute, the Trade Supervisory Office, the Reich Health Council, in the management of the Medical State Investigation Office, etc. It is due to his activities that the city of Stuttgart received its central sewage treatment plant during the First World War. During the entire First World War, Ernst von Scheurlen was involved as a hygienist in disease control and water supply at various sections of the Western and Eastern fronts. After the First World War, he devoted himself in particular to water supply, crop control and blood group research. He has written down his research results in numerous publications. He retired in 1930, but this did not mean the end of his scientific career; his last publication dates from 1950, two years before his death on Oct. 8, 1952 at the age of 89. In addition to his scientific work, Ernst von Scheurlen documented the history of his family from about 1800 with great dedication. For this purpose he combined numerous pictures, sketches, poems and letters of his father, who died at an early age, with other collection material and supplemented, explained and commented this material by a written representation of the family history.

Plan d'ensemble de Kribi, 1:5 000, dessin multicolore, (1905)nnFortification de la Station, 1905n

Geschichte des Bestandsbildners: Rechtsgrundlagen Zu Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts herrschte in Deutschland mit 29 verschiedenen Patentrechten bzw. Privilegienordnungen jeweils territorialer Wirkung eine große Rechtszersplitterung auf dem Gebiet des gewerblichen Rechtsschutzes. Dieser Zustand wurde durch das von einer Patentkommission des Reichskanzleramts erarbeitete Patentgesetz vom 25. Mai 1877 (RGBl. S. 501) beendet. Dieses war mehr industrie- als erfinderfreundlich, denn der Erteilungsanspruch stand dem ersten Anmelder, nicht dem Erfinder zu, und Patente konnten gewerblich verwertet werden. Jedermann hatte das Recht auf Einsichtnahme in die Erteilungsunterlagen. Beschreibungen und Zeichnungen wurden von da an amtlich veröffentlicht. Obwohl die Möglichkeit der Lizenzerteilung an Dritte ohne Übertragung des Patentrechts vorgesehen war, unterlag der Patentinhaber drei Jahre nach der Erteilung einem indirekten Lizenzzwang. Die gesetzlichen Grundlagen für das Kaiserliche Patentamt bildeten das o.g. Patentgesetz und die Verordnung betreffend die Errichtung, das Verfahren und den Geschäftsgang des Patentamts vom 18. Juni 1877 (RGBl. S. 533). Der Patentschutz war aber noch nicht effektiv genug, und die Zahl der Anmeldungen stieg, so dass schon am 4. April 1891 ein neues Patentgesetz (RGBl. S. 79) erlassen wurde. In erster Linie verstärkte es die Rechte der Patentinhaber. Der Neuheitsbegriff im Sinne des § 2 des Gesetzes wurde eingeschränkt und unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen die Aussetzung der Bekanntmachung ermöglicht. Das Gesetz betreffend den Schutz von Gebrauchsmustern vom 1. Juni 1891 (RGBl. S. 290) war eine Ergänzung des Patentgesetzes und trat ebenso wie dieses am 1. Oktober 1891 in Kraft. Es war notwendig geworden, da das Gesetz betreffend das Urheberrecht an Mustern und Modellen vom 11. Januar 1876 (RGBl. S. 11) nur die sogenannten Geschmacksmuster, jedoch nicht die zur Steigerung der Gebrauchsfähigkeit dienenden Modelle (Gebrauchsmuster) schützte. Eine weitere Vereinheitlichung des gewerblichen Rechtsschutzes brachte das Gesetz zum Schutz der Warenbezeichnungen vom 12. Mai 1894 (RGBl. S. 441). Auf diesem Gebiet hatte es bis 1874 lediglich regionale Zeichenrechte gegeben. Das Gesetz über den Markenschutz vom 30. November 1874 (RGBl. S. 1943) hatte die Zuständigkeit für die Registrierung den Amtsgerichten zugewiesen. Nun oblag auch diese Aufgabe dem Patentamt. Das Gesetz betreffend die Patentanwälte vom 21. Mai 1900 (RGBl. S. 233; neugefasst durch das Patentanwaltsgesetz vom 28. September 1933 (vgl. RGBl. II S. 669) führte eine Liste von berufsmäßigen Vertretern im Verfahren vor dem Patentamt, eine Prüfungskommission und einen Ehrengerichtshof für Patentanwälte ein. Starke Reformbestrebungen seit ca. 1900, die 1913 zu einem Entwurf der Reichsregierung für ein neues Patentgesetz nebst Gebrauchsmustergesetz führten, wurden durch den Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkrieges unterbrochen. Sie wurden ab 1927 wieder aufgenommen, konnten auf Grund der innenpolitischen Verhältnisse aber nicht sofort durchgeführt werden und fanden ihren Abschluss erst in den Gesetzen über den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz vom 5. Mai 1936. Das Patentgesetz vom 5. Mai 1936 (RGBl. II S. 117) brachte hauptsächlich dem Erfinder zugute kommende Änderungen, darunter die Ersetzung des Anmelderprinzips durch das Erfinderprinzip, die Unterstützung mittelloser Erfinder und eine Neuheitsschonfrist. Das Patentrecht sollte das geistige Eigentum des Erfinders schützen. Durch das Gebrauchsmustergesetz vom 5. Mai 1936 (RGBl. II S. 130) wurden das materielle Gebrauchsmusterrecht und das Verfahrensrecht an das Patentgesetz angeglichen. Auch das neue Warenzeichengesetz vom 5. Mai 1936 (RGBl. II S. 134) brachte verschiedene Neuerungen. Im Zweiten Weltkrieg gab es neben der Einführung von Geheimpatenten und eingeschränkten Beschwerdemöglichkeiten auch im Interesse der Rüstungswirtschaft stehende Fortschritte im Arbeitnehmererfinderrecht. Aufgaben des Patentamts Die wesentlichen Aufgaben des Patentamts waren die Erteilung von Patenten und die Entscheidung über die Erklärung der Nichtigkeit bzw. die Zurücknahme von Patenten sowie die Erteilung von Zwangslizenzen. Daraus ergab sich eine Doppelfunktion sowohl als Verwaltungsbehörde als auch als gerichtliche Instanz. Eine Möglichkeit der Berufung gegen Nichtigkeitsbeschlüsse bestand beim Reichsoberhandelsgericht in Leipzig, ab dem 1. Oktober 1879 beim Reichsgericht. Einen besonderen Aufgabenbereich des Reichspatentamts in der Zeit des Zweiten Weltkriegs bildete die Vergeltung von Patenten. Auf der Grundlage des § 26 der Verordnung über die Behandlung feindlichen Vermögens vom 15. Januar 1940 (RGBl I S. 191) erließ der Reichsjustizminister in den folgenden Jahren mehrere Verordnungen über gewerbliche Schutzrechte bzw. Urheberrechte ausländischer Staatsangehöriger. Wurden deutschen Staatsangehörigen oder Unternehmen auf Grund fehlender bilateraler Abkommen oder Verträge auf der Grundlage von Ausnahmegesetzen Beschränkungen in der Nutzung von ausländischen Patenten auferlegt und in der Vergeltung ihrer eigenen Patente durch ausländische Firmen eine gegenüber den Bürgern dieser ausländischen Staaten abweichende Behandlung zuteil, so wurden sie für entstandene finanzielle Schäden durch das Deutsche Reich vergolten. An den in Deutschland wirksamen Schutzrechten ausländischer Staatsangehöriger konnten zur Wahrung allgemeiner Belange Ausübungsrechte an deutsche Firmen erteilt werden. Außerdem bestand die Möglichkeit, Patenterteilungen auszusetzen bzw. Gebrauchsmuster und Warenzeichen einzutragen. Die entsprechenden Anordnungen wurden vom Präsidenten des Reichspatentamts getroffen, gegen dessen Entscheidung keine Beschwerde möglich war. Organisation Zu Beginn seiner Tätigkeit gliederte sich das Patentamt in sechs Anmeldeabteilungen (für Patentanmeldungen) und eine Nichtigkeitsabteilung. Es gab keine eigenen Beschwerdeabteilungen, denn über Beschwerden gegen Beschlüsse einer Anmeldeabteilung entschied jeweils eine der anderen Anmeldeabteilungen. Das Patentgesetz von 1891 schuf erstmals die klare funktionelle Trennung von Anmelde-, Beschwerde- und Nichtigkeitsabteilungen sowie ein Vorprüfverfahren durch Mitglieder der Anmeldeabteilungen. Durch das Gebrauchsmustergesetz von 1891 wurde die Einrichtung einer Anmeldestelle für Gebrauchsmuster notwendig. Jedoch fand das Gebrauchsmusterlöschungsverfahren vor den ordentlichen Gerichten statt. Das Warenzeichengesetz von 1894 führte zur Errichtung von Warenzeichenabteilungen. Am 31. Oktober 1917 wurde das Patentamt aus dem Geschäftsbereich des Reichsamts des Innern ausgegliedert und dem Reichsjustizamt nachgeordnet. Am 24. März 1919 erhielt es die Bezeichnung "Reichspatentamt" (RPA). 1926 wurde beim Reichspatentamt der Große Senat gebildet, der die Entscheidungsbefugnis über grundsätzliche Rechtsfragen erhielt. Die Gesetze über den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz von 1936 bewirkten folgende organisatorische Veränderungen: Im Patentbereich wurden die Anmelde-, Beschwerde- und Nichtigkeitsabteilungen in Senate umbenannt, an deren Spitze Senatspräsidenten standen. Im Warenzeichenbereich gab es fortan Warenzeichenabteilungen und Beschwerdesenate. Im Gebrauchsmusterbereich ging die Zuständigkeit für Gebrauchsmusterlöschungsverfahren von den Zivilgerichten auf das Patentamt über. Daher gab es neben der Gebrauchsmusterstelle, die für Anmeldungen zuständig war, auch Gebrauchsmusterabteilungen, die mit Löschungen befasst waren. Durch eine Verordnung vom 17. Juni 1938 (RGBl. I S. 638) wurden das österreichische Patentamt und der österreichische Patentgerichtshof mit Wirkung vom 1. Juli 1938 übernommen und als Zweigstelle Österreich dem Reichspatentamt angegliedert. Die Zweigstelle wurde allerdings durch Erlass des Reichsjustizministers vom 23. Dezember 1941 (s. "Deutsche Justiz" 1942, S. 13) zum 31. März 1942 wieder aufgelöst (vgl. R 131/587-589, 794-796, 1021-1025). Im April 1945 stellte das Reichspatentamt seine Arbeit ein. Bedingt durch die Folgen des Zweiten Weltkrieges entwickelten sich in beiden deutschen Staaten separate Patentämter, in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland das Deutsche Patentamt (DPA) mit Sitz in München sowie einer Außenstelle in Berlin und in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik das Amt für Erfindungs- und Patentwesen (AfEP). Personelle Entwicklung im Patentamt Bei der personellen Besetzung des Patentamts unterschied man neben dem Vorsitzenden, der seit der Bekanntmachung vom 26. Oktober 1882 den Titel "Präsident" führte, zwischen ständigen und nicht ständigen Mitgliedern sowie den "sonstigen" Bediensteten (Hilfskräften). Es gab zum einen rechtskundige, d.h. zum Richteramt oder zum höheren Verwaltungsdienst befähigte, zum anderen technische, d.h. in einem Bereich der Technik sachverständige, Mitglieder, die sämtlich in den Anfangsjahren des Patentamts nebenberuflich tätig waren. Im Jahr 1877 beschäftigte das Patentamt insgesamt 39 Personen. Im Zuge des Personalausbaus erhöhte sich zwar die Zahl der Beschäftigten von 39 (1877) auf 172 (1889), jedoch stieg die Mitgliederzahl nur von 22 auf 36. Der Grund dafür war das verstärkte Einstellen technischer Hilfsarbeiter (wissenschaftlicher Hilfskräfte). Als Folge der Neugestaltung durch das Patentgesetz von 1891, welches auch die Berufung der Mitglieder auf Lebenszeit brachte, wuchs der Personalbestand von über 600 (1900) auf annähernd 1.000 Personen (1914) an. Dabei vergrößerte sich die Zahl der Techniker im Vergleich zu den Juristen immer stärker. Im Ersten Weltkrieg wurden vermehrt weibliche Arbeitskräfte als Hilfskräfte eingestellt. Nach dem Krieg erreichte man den Stand von 1914 erst wieder im Jahr 1926 mit rund 1.000 Bediensteten. Ab 1930 setzte eine rasche Vergrößerung des Personalbestands ein, der seine Höchstzahl 1939 mit ca. 1.900 Personen erreichte. Internationale Zusammenarbeit: Auf internationaler Ebene kam es zur ersten Zusammenarbeit anlässlich der "Pariser Verbandsübereinkunft zum Schutz des gewerblichen Eigentums" vom 20. März 1883 (vgl. R 131/1049-1052, 1055). Dieser trat Deutschland allerdings erst mit Wirkung vom 1. März 1903 bei. Seitdem galt die Übereinkunft als innerdeutsches Recht. Ihre wichtigsten Bestimmungen waren die Unionspriorität und die Inländerbehandlung aller Unionsangehörigen. Diese Handhabung galt seit der Revision von 1911 auch für Gebrauchsmuster und Warenzeichen. Von besonderer Bedeutung ist außerdem das "Madrider Abkommen über die internationale Registrierung von Fabrik- und Handelsmarken" vom 14. April 1891 (vgl. R 131/1040, 1077-1081), dem Deutschland 1924 beitrat. Dies führte zur Bildung der Markenstelle für internationale Markenregistrierung beim Reichspatentamt. Bestandsbeschreibung: Bestandsgeschichte Wie andere Dienststellen der Verwaltung auch lagerte das in der Gitschiner Straße 97-103 in Berlin ansässige Reichspatentamt einen großen Teil seiner Unterlagen während des Zweiten Weltkriegs an Ausweichstandorte aus. Ab 1943 gelangten die Geheimsachen, das gesamte Prüfungsmaterial, die Akten der 21 Patentabteilungen sowie fast alle Unterlagen über noch schwebende Patentanmeldungen (ca. 180.000 Patenterteilungsakten der ersten Instanz) nach Schlesien, in ein leerstehendes Zuchthaus in Striegau und in den Ort Jauer. Die Geheimsachen über Patentanmeldungen, geheime Gebrauchsmuster, erteilte und Sonderpatente wurden im Januar 1945 wieder nach Berlin und im Februar 1945 in ein verlassenes Kalibergwerk in Heringen (Werra) gebracht. Dorthin verlegte man auch die Personalakten sowie einen Großteil der Bibliotheksbestände des Reichspatentamts (ca. 300.000 Bände) und das "Index" genannte Patentregister seit 1939 - mit Ausnahme des Buchstaben R, dessen Register in Striegau verblieb. Striegau wurde am 10. Februar 1945 von sowjetischen Truppen besetzt, die das Zuchthaus sprengten. Das gesamte Prüfungsmaterial, die Akten von 18 Patentabteilungen sowie das Patentregister für den Buchstaben R fielen den Flammen zum Opfer. Die nach der Rückeroberung der Stadt durch deutsche Truppen geborgenen Reste verbrachte man nach Heringen. Das Prüfungsmaterial und die Akten der drei restlichen Patentabteilungen, die zuvor in Jauer aufbewahrt worden waren, verlagerte man nach Eger und von dort aus später nach Lichtenfels. Andere Teile, vor allem Bücher und Prüfungsmaterial, flüchtete man im März 1945 von Striegau aus in eine Försterei in Bayerisch-Eisenstein. Diese Unterlagen überdauerten die Wirren der letzten Kriegstage. Das Schicksal der nach Jauer verlagerten Schriftgutbestände ist indes ungewiss. Von den in Berlin verbliebenen Unterlagen, v.a. Patenterteilungsakten der zweiten Instanz, d.h. Beschwerde- und Nichtigkeitsverfahren, sowie Akten über Gebrauchsmuster- und Warenzeichenverfahren, fielen große Teile den Kriegseinwirkungen in den letzten Monaten des Krieges zum Opfer. Durch Bomben zerstört wurden fast sämtliche Warenzeichenakten (ca. 520.000), Unterlagen über die in Deutschland geschützten, international registrierten Marken, fast sämtliche Gebrauchsmusterakten (ca. 160.000) sowie viele Verwaltungsakten. Vollständig zerstört wurden insbesondere die Sachakten der Personalverwaltung. Erhalten blieben vor allem die Patent-, Gebrauchsmuster- und Warenzeichen-Rollen. Von den sowjetischen Truppen wurden nach ihrem Einmarsch in Berlin am 27. Mai 1945 Patentanmeldungen, die sich im Beschwerdeverfahren befanden (ca. 2.787), Akten über erteilte Patente, von denen noch keine gedruckten Patentschriften vorlagen (ca. 150.000), eine Sammlung der deutschen Patentschriften (ca. 14.000 Bände), Teile der Büchereibestände über wichtige technische Probleme, sämtliche Dissertationen sowie ein Teil der Verwaltungsakten beschlagnahmt und teilweise weggeführt. Als nicht wichtig sah man offenbar die noch nicht bearbeiteten ca. 150.000 Patentanmeldungen an, da von diesen nur Durchschläge vorzufinden waren; die Originale waren in Striegau verbrannt. Die nicht von der UdSSR beschlagnahmten Unterlagen blieben in der Dienststelle Berlin, darunter auch Verwaltungsakten über Rechtssachen, das Patentanwaltswesen, Haushalts- und Kassensachen, und wurden später der Außenstelle Berlin des Deutschen Patentamts übergeben. Nicht mehr im laufenden Geschäftsbetrieb benötigte Unterlagen hatte das Reichspatentamt bereits ans Reichsarchiv auf dem Brauhausberg in Potsdam abgegeben. Dieser Schriftgutbestand wurde im April 1945 zerstört, als das Reichsarchiv nach Bombenabwürfen brannte. Nach dem Einmarsch der Westalliierten in Berlin fand sich die dortige Dienststelle des Reichspatentamts im US-amerikanisch besetzten Sektor der Stadt wieder. Von deren noch vorhandenen, unzerstört gebliebenen Unterlagen, darunter vor allem von den Patentanmeldungen, fertigte die amerikanische "Organization Field Information Agency Technical" (FIAT) Mikrofilme, die in die USA gebracht wurden. Das "British Intelligence Objective Sub-Committee" (BIOS) erstellte Auszüge aus den Patentakten, die in 22 Bänden zusammengefasst der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht wurden. Im Schacht Heringen hatten SD-Angehörige vor der Besetzung durch US-amerikanische Truppen wichtige Patente und Geheimakten (zu 95 Prozent) sowie Personalakten vernichtet. Ein großer Teil der dort verbliebenen Unterlagen, darunter ein Teil noch nicht bearbeiteter geheimer Anmeldungen und die geheime Patentrolle, wie auch der in Lichtenfels und in Bayerisch-Eisenstein sichergestellten Akten, wurde in die USA abtransportiert, unter anderem in das Aktendepot der US Army in Alexandria bei Washington. Das Patentamt erhielt im Juli 1945 die Erlaubnis, seine Tätigkeit wieder aufzunehmen. Als Amt für Bodenforschung wurde es mit Unterstützung der Regierung in Kassel an das Geologische Institut der Universität Marburg verlegt. Seine Akten lagerte man in der Grube Beilstein bei Oberscheld ein. Im Januar 1946 erfolgte die Abtrennung der für die Arbeit im großhessischen Raum benötigten von den die sowjetisch besetzten Gebiete betreffenden Unterlagen. Derart gelangte nach Beilstein das für die Provinzen Schleswig-Holstein, Hannover, Oldenburg, Braunschweig, Westfalen, das Rheinland und Süddeutschland relevante Material. Dem 1949 in München neu eröffneten Deutschen Patentamt übergaben die USA die Bibliothek des Reichspatentamts im Umfang von ca. 350.000 Bänden sowie Fotokopien beschlagnahmter Akten. Das in die USA verbrachte Schriftgut des Reichspatentamts wurde in den 1950er und 60er Jahren in die Bundesrepublik Deutschland zurückgeführt. Größtenteils gelangte das Schriftgut direkt ins Deutsche Patentamt nach München, darunter auch vor der Zerstörung im Schacht Heringen gerettete Personalakten. Die ehemalige Außenstelle des Reichspatentamts in Berlin nahm zu Anfang der 1950er Jahre ihre Arbeit offiziell wieder auf. Diese Treuhandstelle Reichspatentamt - Informationsamt für gewerbliche Schutzrechte wurde 1968 als Dienststelle Berlin in das Deutsche Patentamt übernommen. Die in Alexandria zur Record Group 1016 gehörigen Akten des Reichspatentamts (112 Kartons) wurden 1959 an das Bundesarchiv zurückgegeben, das sie im selben Jahr nach München abgab. Zu den von der Sowjetunion zurückbehaltenen Teilen der Überlieferung des Reichspatentamts gehören 132 Akten, die in den 1960er Jahren von der Geheimen Abteilung des Ministeriums für Landwirtschaft der UdSSR in das sog. "Sonderarchiv" überführt wurden. Diese ausschließlich das Fachgebiet Landwirtschaft betreffenden Akten erstrecken sich über die Laufzeit 1935-1942 und sind in einem russischsprachigen Findbuch erschlossen. Sie befinden sich noch heute in dem zur Aufbewahrung von "Beuteakten" bestimmten Archiv, das heute dem Russländischen Zentralen Staatlichen Militärarchiv untersteht (siehe www.sonderarchiv.de). Generalakten Die Generalakten des Reichspatentamts wurden von den Westalliierten direkt in das Deutsche Patentamt überführt. 1972 gab sie die Dienststelle Berlin des Patentamts an das Bundesarchiv ab (Zugang Nr. I 77/72). Patentanmeldungsakten Bis zum Kriegsende konnten nicht mehr alle Anmeldungen beim Reichspatentamt bearbeitet werden. Die Patentakten aus den Fällen, in denen wegen der Kriegsereignisse in den Jahren 1944-1945 kein Patent mehr erteilt werden konnte und die nicht bekannt gegeben worden waren, wurden zwischen 1945 und 1947 zusammen mit anderen Unterlagen technischer und wissenschaftlicher Art von zunächst militärischen, dann zivilen "Investigating Teams" der Briten und US-Amerikaner beschlagnahmt. Entscheidend für die Auswahl des Materials war das Interesse der britischen und US-amerikanischen Industrie an Fertigungsverfahren der deutschen Kriegswirtschaft. Fachleute beider Seiten arbeiteten anhand der Akten Forschungsberichte, sog. "Reports", über einzelne Firmen oder Produktionssparten sowie kurze Inhaltsbeschreibungen, sog. "Summaries", aus und machten diese der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Großbritannien veröffentlichte die "British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee Overall Reports" (BIOS) und die USA die "Field Information Agency Technical US Group, Control Council for Germany"-Serie (FIAT). Daneben wurde noch gemeinsam die "Combined Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee"-Serie (CIOS) herausgegeben. Die Veröffentlichungen erregten ihrerzeit öffentliches Aufsehen. Der sog. Harmsen-Report übte Kritik an der "Ausbeutung" deutscher Patente seitens der USA und Großbritanniens. Auf britischer Seite war zunächst die "German Division" der "Technical Information and Document Unit" (TIDU) beim "Ministry of Economic Warfare" für diese Aktion zuständig. 1946 wurde die TIDU dem "Board of Trade" unterstellt. 1951 kam diese Informations- und Dokumentationsstelle in den Geschäftsbereich des "Department of Scientific and Industrial Research" (DSIR). Bei der Auflösung der TIDU 1957 übertrug man die Verwahrung des deutschen Aktenmaterials der "Lending Library Unit" des DSIR. Infolge Raummangels wurde diese 1961/62 als "National Lending Library for Science and Technology" nach Boston Spa, Yorkshire, verlegt. Die Originale der von den Briten ausgewerteten deutschen Patentakten befinden sich noch heute in Boston Spa. Zu Anfang der 1950er Jahre erwarb das Deutsche Patentamt in München Mikrofilme dieses Aktenbestands. Diese 1.000 Mikrofilmrollen kopierte das Bundesarchiv in den Jahren von 1969 bis 1974 auf Sicherheitsfilm um. Diese Filmduplikate bilden einen eigenen Teilbestand innerhalb von R 131. Sieben einzelne Patentakten gab das Deutsche Patentamt in München 1972 an das Bundesarchiv ab. Im Jahr 1975 wurden 243 sogenannte "Erteilungsakten" des Reichspatentamts mit der Genehmigung des Bundesarchivs in der Dienststelle Berlin des Deutschen Patentamts kassiert. Mehrere Kartons mit Patentanmeldungsunterlagen gelangten nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg in die DDR, vermutlich in das Zentrale Staatsarchiv der DDR (ZStA) in Potsdam, wo sie zunächst wohl nicht weiter bearbeitet, d.h. auch nicht erschlossen wurden. In Ermangelung entsprechender Dokumentation lässt sich der Zeitpunkt, zu dem diese Unterlagen nach Deutschland kamen, nicht näher bestimmen. Russischsprachige Vermerke auf einzelnen Dokumenten lassen immerhin darauf schließen, dass diese Unterlagen 1945 von den sowjetischen Besatzungstruppen beschlagnahmt und von Fachleuten gesichtet, vermutlich auch ausgewertet wurden. Ob sie im Zuge der sowjetischen Aktenrückgaben in den 1950er Jahren oder zu einem anderen Zeitpunkt nach Deutschland zurückkehrten, ließ sich bisher leider genauso wenig feststellen. Nach der Integration der zentralen Archive der DDR ins Bundesarchiv 1990 wurden diese Unterlagen jedenfalls in die neue Außenstelle des Archivs in Hoppegarten umgelagert. Dort blieben sie bis 2010, als das Archiv Aufräumarbeiten durchführte, weitgehend unbeachtet. Vergeltungsakten Eine wenig umfangreiche Überlieferung an Vergeltungsakten (ca. 420 AE) gelangte im April 1973 durch eine Abgabe (Zugang I 26/73) der Dienststelle Berlin des Deutschen Patentamts ins Bundesarchiv. Personalakten Das Deutsche Patentamt gab im Jahr 1980 aus seiner Dienststelle in München Personalakten von Beamten des Reichspatentamts ab, die nach dem Krieg noch weiterbeschäftigt worden waren. Die in München gelagerten Akten waren infolge eines Brandschadens bei der zu Kriegsende erfolgten Auslagerung, von wenigen Ausnahmen abgesehen, zu großen Teilen angesengt bzw. vollständig verbrannt. Die Dienststelle München gab im selben Jahr 1980 ferner "Personalakten verschiedener Behörden und Gerichte über Personen, deren Zugehörigkeit zum ehemaligen Kaiserlichen Patentamt/Reichspatentamt nicht festgestellt werden konnte", ab. Aus seiner Dienststelle in Berlin gab das Deutsche Patentamt 1980 in dreizehn Kartons 859 Personalakten von Angehörigen des Kaiserlichen bzw. des Reichspatentamts ab. Das Bundesministerium der Justiz (BMJ) als vorgesetzte Dienststelle des Bundespatentamts reichte 1980 im Nachgang eine weitere Archivalieneinheit nach (R 131/2720). Aus den für archivwürdig befundenen Akten wurde im Bundesarchiv der Teilbestand "R 131 - Personalakten" gebildet (Signaturen: R 131/1698-2720). 1981 gab das BMJ weitere 29 Personalakten des Reichspatentamts ab, die dem Bestand beigefügt wurden (R 131/2730-2758). 1995 wurden dem Bundesarchiv vom Deutschen Patentamt, München, 94 Personalakten jüdischer Patentanwälte übergeben (R 131/2760-2853). Im März 2004 gab das Bundespatentamt sechs Kartons mit 325 Personalakten von Patentanwälten an das Bundesarchiv ab. Im April desselben Jahres folgten weitere 194 Akten, im Juli drei weitere Kartons. Spätere Nachlieferungen sind nicht im Einzelnen dokumentiert, auch fehlen weitere Abgabeverzeichnisse oder namentliche Auflistungen. Insgesamt handelt es sich um ca. 19 lfm (38 große Umzugskartons). Aus dem Bestand 30.12 (Reichsjustizprüfungsamt) des Zentralen Staatsarchivs der DDR in Potsdam wurden 0,57 lfm (3 Archivkartons) mit Fragmenten von Personalakten in den Bestand übernommen (Altsignaturen: 30.12/2296-2895). Diese Unterlagen sind noch unbearbeitet wie auch weitere 0,14 lfm (ein Archivkarton) an Fragmenten von Personalunterlagen unbekannter Herkunft. Archivische Bewertung und Bearbeitung Das Schriftgut des Reichspatentamts bildet im Bundesarchiv den Bestand R 131. Für die unterschiedlichen Überlieferungsteile wurden in den 1980er Jahren zunächst jeweils eigenständige Findmittel angefertigt: R 131 - Generalakten R 131 - Vergeltungsakten R 131 - Patentanmeldungsakten R 131 - Personalakten In späteren Jahren kamen weitere Personal- und Patentanmeldungsakten hinzu. Organisationsunterlagen und Aktenpläne des Reichspatentamts sind nicht vorhanden. Lediglich ein Aktenplan von 1935/36 (vgl. R 131/446) konnte ermittelt werden, der in Anlehnung an den Generalaktenplan des Reichsjustizministeriums nach Haupt- und Untergruppen gegliedert, allem Anschein nach aber nie in Kraft getreten ist. Das Fehlen von Aktenplänen bzw. von entsprechend aufschlussreichen sonstigen Nachweisen über die Registraturführung im Reichspatentamt einerseits und das Vorhandensein zahlreicher Akten ohne Aktenzeichen andererseits lassen definitive Aussagen über die Schriftgutverwaltung der Behörde und eine durchweg induktive Klassifikation nicht zu. Generalakten Die Aktenverwaltung oblag den einzelnen Registraturen des Reichspatentamts. Vermutlich führten diese - nach dem Muster der Justiz - jeweils Generalaktenregister, in welche die dort gebildeten Generalakten eingetragen und anhand derer neue Aktenzeichen für neu anfallende Akten vergeben wurden. Es ist auch zu vermuten, dass in einer der Registraturen oder Organisationseinheiten des Hauses ein "vollständiges" Generalaktenregister geführt worden ist. Die Vergabe von Aktenzeichen erfolgte offenbar nach Aufgabenbereichen, gekennzeichnet durch römische Ziffern, so z.B. "gen. I" für Patentsachen. Auf der Aktenstufe vergab man arabische Ziffern, so z.B. "gen. I, 1". In einigen Fällen erfolgte eine weitere Untergliederung des Aktenstoffs durch Anfügen von Kleinbuchstaben an die Grundnummer, so z.B. "gen. III, 4 - Zeichen" "gen. III, 4 a - Freizeichen" "gen. III, 4 b - Wortzeichen" "gen. III, 4 c - Wappen". Zahlreichen Generalakten sind Rotuli vorgeheftet, in denen die Schriftstücke vorgangsweise nachgewiesen sind. Nach klassischem Muster wurden im Reichspatentamt zu den Generalakten auch abgeleitete Akten in Form von Specialia und Adhibenda angelegt: Die Kennzeichnung erfolgte durch die bekannten Abkürzungen "spec." und "adh.". Die Gliederung des Aktenstoffes in diese Aktenkategorien scheint dem Wortsinn nach fast durchweg logisch durchgeführt worden zu sein. Eine erste Bearbeitung der Generalakten nahmen in den Jahren 1984-1985 Dorothe Günthner und Johannes Ganser vor. Bei der Verzeichnung der Akten wurden nicht nur sämtliche Aktenzeichen aufgenommen worden, sondern auch auf den Aktendeckeln angebrachte Hinweise auf verwandte Aktenzeichen, allerdings nur insoweit, als letztere im Bundesarchiv überliefert sind. Der Umstand, dass die Überlieferung des Schriftguts des Reichspatentamts, darunter auch jenes der Generalakten, nur unvollständig in das Bundesarchiv gelangt ist; ist an der Klassifikation deutlich sichtbar. Die Klassifikation des Bestands konnte nach der vom Reichspatentamt vorgenommenen Gruppierung der Akten nach Aufgabenbereichen (römische Ziffern) und Aktennummern (arabische Ziffern) in aufsteigender Zahlenfolge vorgenommen werden, ausgenommen die ohne Aktenzeichen überlieferten Akten zu den Patentanwälten, die als Gruppe VI angefügt wurden. Die Gesamtklassifikation stellt sich folgendermaßen dar: I Patente II Geschmacks- und Gebrauchsmuster III Warenzeichen IV Angelegenheiten von Hauptbüro/Präsidialabteilung V Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz im Ausland VI Patentanwälte. Die Klassifizierung der Gruppen I-III und V gestaltete sich dank vorgegebener Aktenzeichen bei der Mehrzahl der Akten nach diesem Raster problemlos. Die ohne Aktenzeichen vorliegenden Akten in den Gruppen I-III konnten relativ leicht nach sachlichem Zusammenhang zugeordnet werden. Eine tiefer gestufte Klassifikation erschien nicht erforderlich. In den Gruppen I-III waren die Akten-Nummern ursprünglich wohl so vergeben worden, dass sie den jeweiligen Paragrafen der Patent-, Muster- und Warenzeichengesetze entsprachen. Für diejenigen Akten, die nicht in unmittelbarem Bezug zu Gesetzesparagrafen standen, sind die Aktenzeichen offenbar in fortlaufender nummerischer Abfolge vergeben worden. Die Gruppe IV hebt sich gegenüber den übrigen Gruppen insofern ab, als es sich um den schriftlichen Niederschlag übergreifender Tätigkeiten des Hauptbüros bzw. der Präsidialabteilung handelt: Regelungen zur Handhabung der Bestimmungen des Patent-, Gebrauchs- und Geschmacksmuster- sowie des Warenzeichenrechts einerseits sowie Regelungen des Dienstbetriebs, Geschäftsgangs, Postverkehrs andererseits. Hier ist - auf Grund der unvollständigen Überlieferung der Akten - eine Aktenordnung ähnlich jener der Gruppen I-III nicht erkennbar. Wegen der lückenhaften Überlieferung des Bestands einerseits und fehlender Aktenzeichen andererseits - meist sind nur Spezialia oder Adhibenda vorhanden, während die Generalia fehlen -, wurde bei der Klassifikation zwar die Abfolge der Aktenzeichen beibehalten, aber im Unterschied zu den Gruppen I-III und V eine archivische Klassifikation durchgeführt, die eine feiner gestufte Gliederung notwendig machte. Die Akten der Gruppe V sind vom Reichspatentamt nach einem Länderalfabet angelegt, die Aktenzeichen auch hier in aufsteigender Zahlenfolge vergeben worden. Die Reihung der Akten nach Aktenzeichen wurde bei der Klassifikation lediglich dadurch unterbrochen, dass die Akten betreffend internationale Zusammenschlüsse, Abkommen und Kongresse, die mitten in der Länderserie angesiedelt worden waren, dort herausgenommen und an den Schluss der Aktengruppe gestellt wurden. Angesichts im Laufe der Jahrzehnte geänderter Bezeichnungen einzelner Staatsgebiete (vgl. z.B. Schutzgebiete) ist zur Erleichterung der Benutzung ein geografischer Index gefertigt worden. Die ohne Aktenzeichen überlieferten Akten der Gruppe VI wurden nach Sachkomplexen klassifiziert. Kassiert wurden im Jahr 1995 die in den Generalakten enthaltenen und Auszüge aus Gesetzes- und Veröffentlichungsblättern sowie bedeutungsloser Schriftwechsel - z.B. über die Verlegung von Sitzungen des Reichspatentamts. Das von Dorothe Günthner und Johannes Ganser erarbeitete Findbuch wurde von Frau Schuster geschrieben. Diese Erschließungsdaten wurden nach 2005 retrokonvertiert und können nunmehr im Datenbanksystem des Bundesarchivs (BASYS) über das Recherchesystem INVENIO abgerufen werden. Vergeltungsakten Dorothe Günthner und Johannes Ganser bearbeiteten im April 1984 den ersten Teil der Überlieferung. Von den ursprünglich 376 Bänden (ca. 1,5 Gefach) des ersten Überlieferungsteils wurden 75 Bände als archivwürdig bewertet (R 131/10001-10076). Kassiert wurden insbesondere diejenigen Akten, die aus rein formalen Gründen abgelehnte Anträge nach der Verordnung über die Behandlung feindlichen Vermögens vom 15. Januar 1940 (RGBl I S.191) zum Gegenstand haben. Bei Aktengruppen, welche die Bearbeitung von Anträgen einer bestimmten Firma auf die Nutzung von mehreren Patentrechten dokumentieren, die eine andere Firma innehatte, wurde, da ursprünglich für jedes Patent ein einzelner Band angelegt worden war, jeweils nur ein Beispielband aufgehoben. Im 1984 entstandenen Findbuch erschlossen wurden der Name des Antragstellers, des Schutzrechtinhabers, die Laufzeit sowie die alten Vergeltungsaktenzeichen. Auf die Nennung der einzelnen Schutzrechtinhalte wurde verzichtet, da sie hinter dem Aspekt der kriegswirtschaftlichen Maßnahmen des Deutschen Reiches in heutiger Bewertung zurück stehen. Die vorgegebene Gliederung in Akten über erteilte und nicht erteilte Ausübungsrechte wurde beibehalten. Diese beiden Gruppen waren wiederum unterteilt in Patente, Gebrauchsmuster, Warenzeichen, Urheberrechte und Patente in einzelnen eingegliederten Gebieten. In der zweiten Jahreshälfte 2008 wurde der Bestand einer Revision unterzogen, da Unstimmigkeiten im Signaturensystem aufgetaucht waren. 270 Archivalieneinheiten, die bei Bestandsbereinigungen aufgefunden worden waren, wurden neu verzeichnet (R 131/10077-10346). Der gesamte Überlieferungsteil "Vergeltungsakten", der nun insgesamt 345 AE umfasst, wurde eingemappt und vollständig neu signiert. Kassationen wurden nicht vorgenommen. Die Erschließung folgte den Vorgaben des Findbuchs von 1984. Erfasst wurden entsprechend die Namen der Antragsteller, der Schutzrechtinhaber, die Laufzeiten sowie die Aktenzeichen der Vergeltungspatente. Die Verzeichnungsdaten zum ersten Überlieferungsteil wurden per Retrokonversion in die Datenbank des Bundesarchivs (BASYS) übertragen. Bei der Integration der neu hinzugekommenen Unterlagen konnte das bereits vorgegebene Klassifikationsschema beibehalten werden. Das nun vorliegende, von Karl-Heinz Eggert und Sabine Dumschat bearbeitete Findbuch ist auch online recherchierbar. Patentanmeldungsakten Patent- und Gebrauchsmusteranmeldungen wurden im Reichspatentamt bestimmten Klassen zugeordnet. Zu diesem Zweck bestand dort eine nach gewerblichen und industriellen Spezialfachgebieten gegliederte Patentklasseneinteilung. Sie diente als Grundlage für die Bearbeitung der Anmeldungen. Der wichtigste Grundsatz für die Bestimmung der Klassenzugehörigkeit einer Anmeldung war deren Zuweisung in dasjenige Spezialfachgebiet, in dem die Erfindung lag. Zur Feststellung der Erfindung musste der Prüfer alle eingereichten Unterlagen, d.h. Beschreibung, Zeichnung, Ansprüche, heranziehen. Falls mehrere Spezialgebiete vorlagen, fiel die Entscheidung auf die am wichtigsten erscheinende Klasse. Zu den Mikrofilmen jener Akten, die sich bis heute in britischem Gewahrsam, in der "National Lending Library for Science and Technology" in Boston Spa befinden, erstellte 1984 Johannes Ganser ein Findbuch, das im Benutzersaal des Bundesarchivs für Recherchen zur Verfügung steht. Die Grundlage der Gliederung des Teilbestands bildet die beim Reichspatentamt praktizierte Patentklasseneinteilung. Diese war für die Briten bei der Verfilmung der Akten indes nicht der entscheidende Klassifikationsmaßstab. Anmeldungen zu einer bestimmten Klasse können somit auf mehreren Filmen zu finden sein; auf jedem Film sind vice versa Unterlagen zu mehreren Patentklassen zu erwarten. Bei der Benutzung der Filme ist demnach zunächst von dem in Frage kommenden Spezialfachgebiet gemäß der Patentklasseneinteilung auszugehen. Auf welchen Filmrollen zum entsprechenden Fachgebiet Unterlagen vorhanden sind, ist der 1. Konkordanz im Findbuch zu entnehmen. Die 2. Konkordanz stellt die Verknüpfung zwischen den Rollensignaturen und den Filmsignaturen her. Die über das Zentrale Staatsarchiv der DDR überlieferten Einzelfall-Unterlagen wurden im Zeitraum 2011-2012 bearbeitet. Sie befanden sich zunächst in einem ungeordneten, um nicht zu sagen: chaotischen Zustand. Es ist davon auszugehen, dass der Kontext einstmals organisch gewachsener Einzelvorgänge empfindlich gestört ist. Begleitende Dokumentation irgendwelcher Art konnte nicht ermittelt werden. Die Unterlagen waren stoßweise in Papier eingeschlagen und mit Paketband verknotet. Diese Bündel wurden geöffnet, die Unterlagen vollständig durchsortiert. Da kein Überlieferungskontext, geschweige denn ein System der Aktenbildung zu erkennen war, wurde versucht, vermittels alfabetischer Sortierung nach Patent-Anmeldern Abhilfe zu schaffen. Anschließend wurden 314 Archivalieneinheiten gebildet, neu eingemappt und signiert (R 131/10347-10670). Doppelstücke wurden vernichtet, darüber hinaus jedoch keine Kassationen vorgenommen. Eine Akte (R 131/10502) wurde an das Bergbauarchiv im Deutschen Bergbau-Museum, Bochum, abgegeben. Ein "Nachtrag zur Nummernliste" für das Jahr 1933 ist nunmehr in der Dienstbibliothek des Bundesarchivs zugänglich (Signatur: ZB 24128). Sowohl die Klassifikation des Bestands als auch die Erschließungsparameter orientieren sich an dem Muster, welches das Findbuch für die Vergeltungsakten aus dem Jahr 1984 vorgegeben hat. Unterschieden wurden die Anmeldung von Patenten und Gebrauchsmustern, ungültige Patente und Hilfsmittel in Form von Unterlagen, welche die Zulassungen ausländischer Patentämter dokumentieren. Unterschieden wurde nach Anmeldern, die im Deutschen Reich ansässig waren, und solchen, die vom Ausland aus ihre Ansprüche geltend zu machen versuchten. Bei letzteren handelt es sich unter anderem um Dependancen deutscher Konzerne im Ausland. Im Einzelnen erfasst wurden bei der Erschließung jeweils: Namen der anmeldenden Firmen oder privaten Antragsteller bzw. der Patentinhaber, schlagwortartig der Patentanspruch, d.h. der Gegenstand des Patents respektive das zu schützende Verfahren, das Aktenzeichen des Reichspatentamts, gegebenenfalls auch die zugeteilte Patentnummer sowie die Laufzeiten der Akten. Das nun vorliegende, von Karl-Heinz Eggert und Sabine Dumschat bearbeitete Findbuch ist auch online recherchierbar. Personalakten Von den vom Deutschen Patentamt 1980 aus seiner Dienststelle in München abgegebenen Personalakten von Beamten des Reichspatentamts, die nach dem Krieg noch weiterbeschäftigt worden waren, wurden nur zwei als archivwürdig angesehen. Der Rest wurde kassiert. Die in den Bestand R 131 integrierten Akten sind vorläufig personenbezogen erschlossen (sog. "Anlage 2"). Bei allen im selben Jahr 1980 abgegebenen "Personalakten verschiedener Behörden und Gerichte über Personen, deren Zugehörigkeit zum ehemaligen Kaiserlichen Patentamt/Reichspatentamt nicht festgestellt werden konnte", handelte es sich bei näherer Prüfung um Vorakten des Reichspatentamts. Die Mehrzahl der Akten wurde für kassabel befunden (untergeordnetes Büropersonal). Lediglich 14 Akten wurden in den Bestand übernommen: R 131/1737, 1754, 1787, 1804, 1942-1943, 1996, 2609, 2000, 2000 a, 2000 b und 2721-2723. Sie sind in einem Vorläufigen Verzeichnis personenbezogen erfasst (sog. "Anlage 3"). Mit den aus seiner Dienststelle in Berlin 1980 in 13 Kartons übergebenen 859 Personalakten von Angehörigen des Kaiserlichen bzw. des Reichspatentamts lieferte das Deutsche Patentamt ebenfalls ein Vorläufiges Verzeichnis mit namentlicher Auflistung (sog. "Anlage 4") ab. Abgesehen von den Akten R 131/2724, 2725 und 2726 waren diese Unterlagen stark zerstört und kassabel. Zu den "bei der Dienststelle Berlin des Deutschen Patentamts befindlichen Personalakten oder Personalaktenteile[n] über Angehörige des ehemaligen Kaiserlichen Patentamts und des Reichspatentamts" existiert allerdings noch eine zweite, leider undatierte, namentliche Aufstellung mit 875 Einzelpositionen, die sich mit der oben genannten nicht deckt. Eine eindeutige Klärung kann erst die Erschließung aller noch nicht in BASYS erfassten archivwürdigen Personalakten ergeben. Aus den nach der Bewertung verbliebenen Akten wurde im Bundesarchiv der Teilbestand "R 131 - Personalakten" gebildet (Signaturen: R 131/1698-2720). 1981 kamen die vom Bundesministerium der Justiz abgelieferten 29 Personalakten des Reichspatentamts hinzu, zu denen gleichfalls ein Vorläufiges Verzeichnis vorhanden ist (R 131/2730-2758). Eine namentliche Auflistung existiert ebenso zu den 1995 vom Deutschen Patentamt abgegebenen 94 Personalakten jüdischer Patentanwälte (R 131/2760-2853). Von den im Jahre 2004 vom Deutschen Patentamt abgegebenen Personalakten, v.a. von Patentanwälten, liegen bisher lediglich zu 519 namentliche Auflistungen vor. Eine Bewertung der 38 große Umzugskartons umfassenden Ablieferungen steht noch aus. Ebenso müssen die aus dem Bestand 30.12 (Reichsjustizprüfungsamt) des Zentralen Staatsarchivs der DDR in Potsdam aussortierten Fragmente von Personalakten sowie die weiteren 0,14 lfm (ein Archivkarton) Personalunterlagen unbekannter Herkunft noch bearbeitet werden. Inhaltliche Charakterisierung: Inhaltliche Charakterisierung Generalakten Der Generalaktenbestand gibt einen Einblick in die Tätigkeit des Reichspatentamts, der von erheblichem Wert für die Geschichte der Technik und die Entwicklung des Rechtswesens, insbesondere des gewerblichen Rechtsschutzes in Deutschland, sein dürfte. Hervorhebenswert sind die umfangreiche Sammlung von Gesetzen und Verordnungen zum gewerblichen Rechtsschutz im Ausland sowie die Akten aus der Mitarbeit des Reichspatentamts in der Internationalen Union zum Schutz des gewerblichen Eigentums. Diese Mitarbeit hatte auch das Ziel, die internationalen Abkommen mit den deutschen Gesetzen auf diesem Gebiet zu koordinieren. Nach 1945 hatte das Reichspatentamt noch partiell weiter gearbeitet, was die Fortführung einiger Akten bis 1951 erklärt. Überlieferung: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 (1946-1951) (1.171 AE): Patente 1877-1949 (187), Gebrauchs- und Geschmacksmuster 1877-1945 (24), Warenzei‧chen 1894-1945 (65), Patentklasseneinteilung 1882-1944 (9), Abteilungsmitgliedersitzungen und -entscheidungen 1877-1945 (30), Post- und Fernmeldewesen, Auslegestellen 1879-1946 (28), Annahme und Anmeldung 1877-1945 (21), Veröffentlichungen 1878-1949 (47), Zivilgerichtsbarkeit und Rechtsauskünfte 1879-1944 (13), Dienstbetrieb, Aktenführung und Präsidialverfügungen 1877-1948 (76), kriegsbedingte Maßnahmen auf dem Gebiet des ge‧werblichen Rechtsschutzes 1914-1948 (49), Zusammenarbeit mit Ingenieur- und Erfinder‧verbänden 1911-1951 (11), gewerblicher Rechtsschutz im Ausland 1878-1944 (13), ein‧zel‧ne Länder 1877-1944 (425), internationale Zusammenschlüsse, Abkommen und Kongresse 1878-1944 (57), Patentanwaltsgesetz, Patentanwaltskammer 1933-1949 (5), Eintragung und Löschung als Patentanwalt 1900-1948 (34), Ausbildung und Prüfung, Berufsausübung und Ehrengerichtsbarkeit 1900-1950 (41), Patentanwaltswesen im Ausland 1894-1949 (36) Findmittel: Findbuch (1984) und BASYS/INVENIO-Recherche Vergeltungsakten Die 1973 ins Bundesarchiv gelangten Akten dokumentieren die Behandlung von Anträgen einzelner Firmen auf die Erteilung von Ausübungsrechten gemäß der Verordnung über gewerbliche Schutzrechte britischer Staatsangehöriger vom 26. Februar 1940 (RGBl I S. 424), der Verordnung über Urheberrechte britischer Staatsangehöriger vom 1. Juli 1940 (RGBl I S. 947) sowie der Verordnung über gewerbliche Schutzrechte und Urheberrechte von Angehörigen der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika vom 22. Dezember 1942 (RGBl I S. 737). Die für archivwürdig befundenen Vergeltungsakten besitzen somit einen gewissen Aussagewert über das Verhältnis Deutschlands zu den USA und Großbritannien, wenn auch beschränkt auf den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz während des Zweiten Weltkriegs. Darüber hinaus ist zu erkennen, auf welchen Gebieten Erfindungen als kriegswichtig und als zur Wahrung allgemeiner Belange notwendig angesehen wurden. Die in den Jahren 2008-2010 nacherschlossenen Unterlagen behandeln vor allem deutsche Reichspatente, die Urheberrechte für künstlerische Werke, deutsche Warenzeichen und österreichische Marken. Überlieferung: 1940-1945 (345 AE): Erteilte Ausübungsrechte: deutsche Reichspatente 1940-1945 (4), Patentanmeldungen 1941 (1), österreichische Patente 1940-1944 (1), Patente Protektorat Böhmen und Mähren 1940-1945 (2), deutsche Gebrauchsmuster 1940-1941 (1), deutsche Warenzeichen 1940-1942 (2), Warenzeichen Protektorat Böhmen und Mähren 1941-1942 (1), Urheberrechte für künstlerische Werke 1941-1945 (7); nicht erteilte Ausübungsrechte: deutsche Reichspatente 1940-1945 (175), Patentanmeldungen 1940-1944 (14), deutsche Gebrauchsmuster 1940-1941 (1), deutsche Warenzeichen 1940-1945 (44), österreichische Marken 1940-1945 (19), Urheberrechte für künstlerische Werke 1940-1945 (73) Findmittel: Online-Findbuch Patentanmeldungen a) Auf den Mikrofilmen jener Unterlagen, deren Originale sich bis heute in der "National Lending Library for Science and Technology" in Boston Spa befinden, sind aneinander gereiht einzelne Patentanmeldungen mit den dazugehörigen Erläuterungen zu finden. Sie erstrecken sich über den Zeitraum 1941-1945. Bearbeitungsvermerke oder Schreiben des Reichspatentamts sind selten vorhanden. Lediglich Hinweise auf Druckschriften, die zur Abgrenzung des Anmeldungsgegenstands in Betracht gezogen wurden, tauchen hin und wieder auf. Diese Unterlagen stammen aus Verfahren, die wegen des Kriegsgeschehens nicht zu Ende geführt werden konnten, zu denen keine Patente mehr erteilt wurden. Dennoch geben sie einen Einblick in die Anstrengungen und Errungenschaften deutscher Erfinder und Unternehmen in der Spätphase des Zweiten Weltkriegs. Man erkennt teilweise, welche gewerblichen und industriellen Zweige infolge der kriegsbedingten Probleme zurückgestellt werden mussten. Der technikgeschichtliche Wert der Unterlagen dürfte nicht unerheblich sein. Überlieferung: Patentanmeldeakten 1941-1945 (999 Mikrofilme) Findmittel: Findbuch (1984) b) Die über das Zentrale Staatsarchiv der DDR überlieferten Unterlagen beziehen sich vornehmlich auf Erfindungen, die mit dem Wirtschaftsbereich des Bergbaus zu tun haben. Es handelt sich um in ihrer Struktur gleichförmige Einzelfall-Vorgänge, denen in der Regel allerdings die Anlagen abhanden gekommen sind, die zur Erteilung von Patenten herangezogen werden mussten. Ein Teil dieser Anlagen sind vermutlich die als "Hilfsmittel" verzeichneten fremdsprachigen Unterlagen. Da die registraturmäßige Ordnung dieses Überlieferungsteils vollkommen zerstört vorgefunden wurde und die verbliebenen Unterlagen zu wenige Geschäftsgangsvermerke tragen, war eine Rekonstruktion der ursprünglichen Vorgänge leider nicht möglich. Überlieferung: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 (314 AE): Patentanmeldungen (249): Deutsches Reich 1878-1945 (211), Großbritannien 1883-1942 (6), Belgien 1905-1944 (2), Frankreich 1881-1937 (4), Niederlande 1915-1939 (2), Österreich 1897-1945 (2), Ungarn 1902-1945 (4), USA 1880-1939 (8), andere Länder 1888-1942 (10); Gebrauchsmuster (12): Deutsches Reich 1913-1939 (11), Ausland 1927-1936 (1); ungültige Patente (7): Deutsches Reich 1877-1941 (4), Ausland: Frankreich 1905-1927 (2), andere Länder 1905-1929 (1); Hilfsmittel (46): Großbritannien 1877-1937 (12), Frankreich 1907-1937 (11), USA 1875-1938 (20), andere Länder 1894-1939 (3) Findmittel: Online-Findbuch Personalakten Der Teilbestand umfasst Personalakten von Mitarbeitern des Reichspatentamts sowie von Patentanwälten. Zu letzteren zählen 84 jüdische Anwälte, denen man ihrer Abstammung wegen die Zulassung entzog und die entsprechend 1933 bzw. 1938 aus der im Patentamt geführten Anwaltsliste gelöscht wurden. Überlieferung: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 (1.155 AE), 19,71 lfm unbearbeitet Umfang: Gesamt: ca. 100 lfm und 999 Mikrofilme Generalakten: 44,9 lfm - 1.171 AE (R 131/1-1205) Vergeltungsakten: 3,7 lfm - 345 AE (R 131/10001-10346) Patentanmeldungen: 314 AE (R 131/10347-10670) und 999 Mikrofilmrollen (R 131/EC 3317-EC 4316) Personalakten: 28,11 lfm - 1.155 AE (R 131/1698-2853) 19,71 lfm unbearbeitet "Erteilungsakten": 0,14 lfm unbearbeitet Gesamtlaufzeit des Bestands: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 (1946-1951) Teilbestände: Generalakten: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 (1946-1951) Vergeltungsakten: 1940-1945 Patentanmeldungsakten: Filme 1941-1945 Akten (1877-1918) 1919-1945 Personalakten: (1877-1918) 1919-1945 Erschließungszustand (Überblick): Generalakten: Findbuch (1984) und BASYS/INVENIO-Recherche Patentanmeldungsakten: Findbuch (1984) zu den Filmen, Online-Findbuch zu den Akten Vergeltungsakten: Online-Findbuch Personalakten: Vorläufige Verzeichnisse Hinweis: Online-Findmittel liegen bisher nur zu den Vergeltungs- und den nicht verfilmten Patentanmeldungsakten vor. Erschließungszustand: Erschließungszustand (Überblick): Generalakten: Findbuch (1984) und BASYS/INVENIO-Recherche Patentanmeldungsakten: Findbuch (1984) zu den Filmen, Online-Findbuch zu den Akten Vergeltungsakten: Online-Findbuch Personalakten: Vorläufige Verzeichnisse Hinweis: Online-Findmittel liegen bisher nur zu den Vergeltungs- und den nicht verfilmten Patentanmeldungsakten vor. Zitierweise: BArch, R 131/...

Contains among other things: Reports, drawings of various canals in the Schantung area Chinese regulation projects of the waterways in Schantung Expert opinion on the condition of the emperor's canal from Chin kiang to Han tschwang and the future prospects for shipping of 1909

cote incertaine

Abschnitt Sumatra - Marquesas-Inseln, Japan - Neuseeland. Weigel und Schneider (Buchhandlung, Herausgeber). 2. Auflage, Stich, handkoloriert (Grenze von Asien rot, Gebiet Indonesien gelb, Australien, Neuguinea und Mikronesien grün, Polynesien und Melanesien rot) verbleicht. Ca. 1 : 23.000.000. Nürnberg. Vertikal gefaltet, 67,5 x 50 cm; thematische Karte (Entdeckungsfahrten); nicht maßstabsgetreu (Neuguinea gestreckt, Tasmanien mit Australien verbunden); auf Karton aufgezogen. Bem.: ohne Maßstab; äquatorialständiges Meridiangitternetz (Greenwich) mit Himmelsrichtungsangaben; Bezeichnung Australiens als "Neu-Holland"; Einzeichnung der Entdeckungsfahrten (farbig) und geographischer Besonderheiten, Stempel (?) auf Rückseite. Vorsignaturen: 222; A 19.

Responsibility for construction has changed several times since the introduction of the Ministerial Constitution in Prussia in 1808. Since 1808 building matters were dealt with in the 2nd Section for Trade Police in the Ministry of the Interior, in 1814 they were transferred to the Ministry of Finance. In 1817 an independent Ministry for Trade, Commerce and Construction was formed from the corresponding section, which was dissolved again in 1825. After the dissolution of this ministry, the building cases were successively assigned to different ministries and were returned to the Ministry of Finance in 1837, where they remained until the creation of the Ministry of Public Works in 1878. The newly created Ministry was also responsible for railways (see: I. HA Rep. 93 E). As the central authority for building construction, railways, roads and hydraulic engineering, the Ministry and its subordinate authorities and bodies were responsible for planning, designing and supervising the execution of the works carried out by the State in these areas. The Ministry cooperated with the military building authorities in the construction of military buildings. When the Ministry of Public Works was dissolved in 1921, the railway administration and part of the hydraulic and road works were transferred to the Reich. The rest of the portfolio was divided among the Prussian Ministries of Trade and Industry, Agriculture, Domains and Forests, and Finance. The building construction was transferred to the Ministry of Finance and formed its own department there. Heinrich Waldmann has conducted a detailed investigation into the history of the ministry (including the previous authorities). Annex V of the paper also contains an overview of the periodicals published by the Ministry. The indexing and organization of the building department of the Ministry of Public Works was carried out in 1968 by the archivist Maria Lehmann under the guidance of the lecturer Heinrich Waldmann. At the same time, the files that had accumulated at other ministries before the creation of the Ministry of Public Works were brought together in this inventory. This also applies to files of the building construction department of the Ministry of Finance, in so far as they were proven to be assigned to the Ministry of Public Works. The stock Ministry of Public Works is divided into four departments: 1 Administration 2 Building construction 3 Road and bridge construction 4 Hydraulic engineering In the years 1995/96, the part of the stock remaining in Dahlem Ministry of Public Works (208 VE) was dissolved and for the most part included in the stock I. HA Rep. 93 B Ministry of Public Works incorporated. 61 file volumes were assigned to the Railway Department (I. HA Rep. 93 E). The production of a finding aid book was all the more necessary, since so far as finding aids only the finding aid card index provided in the year 1968, meanwhile badly readable, partly damaged and not yet finally edited was present. Some title recordings were checked for questionable spelling of individual place and person names or questionable dating on the basis of the tape in the outdoor magazine. In the stock Rep. 93 B the former stock Rep. 93 C was already incorporated in Merseburg. In the literature a part of the files of the Ministry of Public Works are still cited with the inventory designation Rep. 93 C and old file number. A corresponding concordance was therefore compiled in a separate volume. In 1992, 12 linear metres (405 units) of files from the Prussian Ministry of Public Works were transferred from the Bundesarchiv Potsdam to the Geheime Staatsarchiv PK. In November 1990, the files had been transferred to the Federal Archives under the provenance of the Reich Ministry from the Military Interim Archive Potsdam, into which they had entered in 1971 from the Administrative Archive of the National People's Army. These files, which have been valid since the Second World War for lost files, concern lighthouse and nautical marker matters on the Prussian coasts of the Baltic and North Seas in the period from 1800 to 1932. A large number of the volumes contain maps, site plans, technical drawings with scale specifications, construction sketches as well as blueprints of lighthouses and lighthouse parts or other inventions in nautical marker matters. About 100 files form the file group "Handakten des Seezeichenausschusses" . Most of these files were recorded by Dr Meyer-Gebel, Dr Strecke and the undersigned in the period 1992 to 1993. The incorporation of these archival documents and the technical processing of the magazine into the hydraulic engineering department took place in 1996. Furthermore, from the end of 1996 to 1998, 110 packages (905 units; approx. 15 linear metres) with the designation "Rep. 93 unprocessed access Magdeburg" were recorded, which were stored at the end of the inventory. The origin of the name "Zugang Magdeburg" is not comprehensible. In the inventory file "Economy and Transport" from the period from 1959 to 1974 no such information could be found. In contrast, in the file "Aktenzugänge, 1965-1974" (Access to Files, 1965-1974), it was possible to ascertain a case of a larger file transfer from the German Central Archive Potsdam in 1970. The archives mainly consist of hydraulic engineering documents, including river regulations, harbour, dune, bank and lock constructions, as well as memorandums, calculations, maps and plans (some coloured) on the construction and extension of waterways. These include 29 volumes from the Planning Chamber of the Ministry of Public Works, including an inventory extract of the maps and town plans available in the Planning Chamber. Oversized maps or plans as well as drawings were taken from the holdings and assigned to the XI HA General Map Collection. 211 file volumes, mainly journals and index volumes, have been incorporated into the Railway Department (I. HA Rep. 93 E) of the Ministry of Public Works inventory. When the files were entered into the Oracle database of the Secret State Archives, the data records of the holdings already entered under the old IT system were corrected or standardised. In February 1999 the magazine-technical processing took place. The Department of Hydraulic Engineering is now the most comprehensive collection of the Rep. 93 B Ministry of Public Works. Due to the frequent change of responsibility for the building industry, the holdings of the I. Main Department Rep. 77 Ministry of the Interior, Rep. 87 Ministry of Agriculture, Domains and Forests, Rep. 120 Ministry of Trade and Industry and Rep. 151 Ministry of Finance are to be consulted in addition to the holdings listed below. As part of the preparation of an inventory of the Prussian building administration until 1848, files from the Ministry of Public Works, among other things, were made accessible in detail. Berlin, January 2000. signed Constanze Krause Find resources: database; table of contents, 1 vol.; find book, 3 vol.; concordance, 1 vol;

• Minutes of the meetings of the Senate Committee for Exhibition Affairs:<br />15 Dec. 1897 (constituent meeting; participants: Heyden, Koepping, Knaus, Manzel, Otzen, Graf Harrach, Siemering, v. Oettingen): Election of Otzen as chairman, resolution to invite the elected deputies to the meetings; discussion about the participation of the Academy in the conception and financing of the Landeskunstausstellung, about its relationship to the Verein Berliner Künstler, about a redesign of the Große Berliner Kunstausstellung (Bl. 1f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1898: Heyden, Knaus, Koepping, Manzel, Otzen, v. Oettingen, Siemering.<br />23rd Febr. 1898: Report on the Fechner and Schuch brochures on exhibitions; resolution: summary of the discussion including the relevant work by Heyden (Bl. 2). 1898: Exhibition of the works of the member Michetti, withdrawal of the application of Siemering (exhibition of the works of all academy members), recommendation to apply for an exhibition of the works of the architect Wolff to the Architects Association (Bl. 2f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1899: Otzen, Ende, Heyden, Knaus, Koepping, Manzel, v. Oettingen, Siemering, v. Tschudi.<br />30th Jan. 1899: Brochures by Fechner, Schuch and Heyden; discussion about the future design of the Great Berlin Art Exhibitions, question of the jury; establishment of a travel fund to foreign exhibitions for deputies of the academy; proposal: captions instead of exhibition catalogue; division of the exhibition halls and the jury between academy and association of Berlin artists (Bl. 12).<br />24 Febr. 1899: support for an exhibition of works by Paul Meyerheim, Jan./Febr. 1900, unless a secular exhibition is organized; question of the jury [of the Great Berlin Art Exhibitions] (p. 12).<br />30 June 1899: Exhibition of French paintings under the direction of Dramard (President of the Société des Amis des Arts in Paris) in Oct. 1899, review of the selection of works by Koepping (p. 13).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1900: End, Friedrich, Kampf, Manzel, Schwechten, Siemering.<br />14 Nov. 1900 (constituent meeting): Election of Friedrich as chairman; discussion of various proposals for exhibitions: Koner, Chodowiecki, collection of paintings by the banker König, colonial pictures by L. Braun and Petersen; provision of rooms for an exhibition by the Verein der Freunde künstlerischer Photographie (Bl. 13).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1901: End, Friedrich, Kampf, Manzel, Oettingen, Scheurenberg, Schwechten, Siemering, Steinhausen, Renvers.<br />19 Jan. 1901: adjourned (p. 14).<br />23 Jan. 1901: adjourned (p. 14). 1901: Sequence of exhibitions in spring (Kronjubiläum, Koner, Verein Berliner Künstlerinnen, Konkurrenzen); rejection of an exhibition of works by the sculptor Guild; application of the Kunstverein Frankfurt/Main for an organisational merger in exhibition matters; rejection of Fechner's application (request of the imperial court) for the organisation of a portrait exhibition of Bismarck and other famous men of the 19th century. 13 Nov 1901: Re-election of the chairman Friedrichs; rejection of exhibitions of works by Hermione v. Preuschen, Gysis, and the portrait painter Hans Schadow; application for the abolition of the ministerial permit requirement for the exhibition of paintings from foreign collections in the academy; formation of a commission for the design of future academy exhibitions (Ende, Siemering, Kampf, v. Oettingen); on the application of the Vereinigung Berliner Architekten for the conversion of the Landeskunstausstellungsgebäude (Bl. 14f.).<br />16 Dec. 1901: Design of the special exhibitions in the future academy building, financing issues (creation of a separate fund for the exhibitions); rejection of exhibition projects: Association of lithographers, exhibition of the artistic estate of the architect August Orth (page 15).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1902: Steinhausen, Manzel, Oettingen, Scheurenberg, Schwechten, Siemering.<br />19th Apr. 1902: Recommendation for the provision of rooms for exhibitions of the Verein für Deutsches Kunstgewerbe Berlin and the Zentralkomitees für das ärztliche Fortbildungswesen in Preußen (Bl. 15).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1903: End, Calandrelli, Friedrich, Oettingen, Scheurenberg, Schwechten.<br />10th Jan. 1903: Constitution of the committee for 1902/03 and election of Friedrich as chairman; inquiry by A. v. Keller, Munich, for exhibition rooms for the Munich Secession; on the contract of a brewery company for the construction of a restaurant on the exhibition site (p. 40).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1906: Joachim, Otzen, Frenzel, Janensch, Justi, Kampf, Koepping, Lessing, Messel, Meyerheim, Raschdorff, Schwechten, Skarbina, Tuaillon, Baumeister Wendt and Lotter.<br />12 Febr. 1906: Constitution of the committee and election of Kampf as chairman, von Koepping as deputy chairman. Reflections on the exhibition on the occasion of the opening of the new office building at Pariser Platz; Rembrandt exhibition, temporary postponement of a members' exhibition (p. 40).<br />3 March 1906: Debate on the submission of the Leipzig painter Klamroth to Wilhelm II on jury-free exhibitions (p. 40). 41f.).<br />14 March 1906: Decision to open the new office building with an exhibition of works by the members, extension of the committee in preparation for the opening exhibition; appeal to the members to send in works, recommendations for the design of the exhibition rooms (pp. 43f.).<br />21 May 1906: Design of the exhibition rooms; costs of the opening exhibition (p. 45).<br />8 Sept. 1906: constitution of the committee and election of Arthur Kampf as chairman for 1906/07, von Koepping as deputy chairman; design of the exhibition rooms (p. 45).<br />31 Oct. 1906: selection criteria for the architects' objects; duration of the exhibition and catalogue (p. 45).<br />31 Oct. 1906: selection criteria for the architects' objects; duration of the exhibition and catalogue (p. 45).<br />8 Sept. 1906: constitution of the committee and election of Arthur Kampf as chairman for 1906/07, von Koepping as deputy chairman; design of the exhibition rooms (p. 45).<br />31 Oct. 1906: selection criteria for the architects' objects; duration of the exhibition and catalogue (p. 45). 45f.).<br />21 Dec. 1906: Design of the exhibition rooms, catalogue, press conference (p. 46).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1907: Kampf, Frenzel, Friedrich, Gaul, Herrmann, Hoffmann, Janensch, Justi, Koepping, Lessing, Messel, Meyerheim, Otzen, Schwechten, Skarbina, Tuaillon.<br />9 Jan. 1907: Design of the exhibition rooms, invitation cards (p. 47).<br />6 Feb. 1907: Entry regulations for the members of the Verein Berliner Künstler, the Verein der Künstlerinnen, the Secession and for the academy members, conditions of sale (p. 47). 47).<br />27 March 1907: Reimbursement of transport costs for sculptors, remunerations for office workers at exhibitions, further planned exhibition for autumn, invitation to non-members (e.g. Stuck, Leistikow, Sargent, Lederer, Starck, Hocheder, Bl. 48);<br />22 Apr. 1907: Proposals for non-members to be invited to the autumn exhibition, e.g. Sargent, Kuehl, Leistikow; Gobelin exhibition of the company Sargent, Kuehl, Leistikow; Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin, Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin, Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company Gobelin exhibition of the company. Gerson; Extension of the exhibition commission by members to be elected by the cooperative, proposal to transfer the management of the Academy exhibitions of the Academy to the commission (pp. 48f.).<br />1 Oct. 1907: Constitution of the committee, election of Koepping as chairman; Gussow exhibition (pp. 49).<br />26 Oct. 1907: Equipment of the exhibition rooms, number of works to be submitted, works of L. v. Hofmanns; draft for the organization of the exhibition committee; co-optation of members (Hoffmann, Herrmann, Gaul) into the committee; on the possibility of an exhibition of older English art from the possession of German princely houses (p. 50).<br />11 Nov. 11. 1907: Cancellations by foreign artists (Serow, Besnard) for the exhibition in the Academy; number of works to be submitted; Berlin members; catalogue, poster and admission tickets; sales; for the planned exhibition of English Art (pp. 50f.).<br />11 Dec. 1907: Decision to hold an exhibition of English Art; watercolour exhibition at the suggestion of Wilhelm II. (pp. 51f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1908: Kampf, Friedrich, Gaul, Herrmann, Hoffmann, Janensch, Justi, Koepping, Scheurenberg, Schmidt, Schwechten, Skarbina.<br />16. Jan. 1908: Photogravure edition of the exhibition of English Art; exhibition of the Werdandibund (pp. 51f.); exhibition of the Werdandibund (pp. 52).<br />4 March 1908: Income and expenditure of the exhibition English Art; exhibition Fritz Werner and Louis Jacoby; Marées exhibition at the suggestion of Meier-Graefe; exhibition on the occasion of the birthday of Wilhelm II. in 1909 with works by Schadow and members; plan of a memorial exhibition for the members Thumann und Ende (p. 53).<br />17 March 1908: to participate in the Brussels World Exhibition 1910; decision: Marées exhibition not in the Academy; application of the Association of German Sculptors for free admission; organisation of the exhibition committee; season tickets for the wives of the members (p. 53f).<br />23 Apr. 1908: Exhibition of the artistic estate of Peter Janssen; exhibition of older French art by the Deutsch-Französische Gesellschaft; member exhibition Jan. 1909; watercolour exhibition (pp. 54f.).<br />14 Aug. 1908: Constitution of the committee, election of Koepping as deputy chairman; election of the cooperative members to be co-opted; invitations to non-members (e.g. Slevogt, Orlik, Looschen, Kuehl) to the watercolour exhibition; proposals for the redesign of the exhibition rooms; Schadow exhibition, participation of non-members in the exhibition (pp. 56f.).<br />10 Oct. 1908: Watercolor exhibition (p. 58).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1909: Kampf, Friedrich, Gaul, Herrmann, Hoffmann, Janensch, Justi, Koepping, Lessing, Manzel, Scheurenberg, Schwechten, Skarbina.<br />18th Jan. 1909: Structure of the Schadow exhibition (p. 58).<br />26 Oct. 1909: Re-election of the co-opted cooperative members; resolution: no member exhibition in the winter of 1910/11; exhibition of French art of the 18th century. Reisinger's proposal: exhibition of American art; no Menzel memorial exhibition (pp. 58f.).<br />Dec. 8, 1909: planned exhibitions; design of the exhibition rooms; request for plaster casts of Pigalles Venus and Mercury; exhibition of a painting by Melchior Lechter in the Akademie-Saal (pp. 59f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1910: v. Groszheim, Amersdorffer, Frenzel, Gaul, Herrmann, Kampf, Manzel, Scheurenberg, Schwechten.<br />19. July 1910: composition of the committee 1910/11 (list of names); constitution of the committee and election of Arthur Kampf as chairman; German Arts and Crafts Exhibition in Rio de Janeiro; exhibition of watercolours and plans of the Chicago Commercial Club in the academy at March's suggestion; exhibition of members 1911 (Bl. 60f.).<br />28 Oct. 1910: Non-members to be invited to the members' exhibition (list of names); co-optation of Frenzel (instead of Herrmann) to the committee (pp. 61f.).<br />21 Dec. 1910: Member exhibition in winter 1911, especially exhibition conditions; exhibition of East Asian art 1911; Knaus- and Woldemar-Friedrich memorial exhibition in connection with a Löfftz exhibition; exhibition of the Italian painters Fornara and Breviati (Bl. 62f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1911: v. Groszheim, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Gaul, Herrmann, Hoffmann, Justi, Kampf, Koepping, Manzel, Rüfer, Scheurenberg, Schmidt.<br />16 Jan 1911: Visit of the rooms of the winter exhibition; Bismarck portrait of Knaus; no permission to exhibit the anniversary portfolio of the Verein für Originalradierung; rejection of Eberlein's request for an exhibition of a work; approval of the request of Justi for an exhibition of the new acquisitions of the Nationalgalerie; renunciation of a Löfftz exhibition; support of a memorial exhibition for Knaus and Friedrich (Bl. 64f.).<br />7 Nov. 1911 (together with the Committee for General and Administrative Affairs): Constitution of the Committee and election of Koepping as Chairman; Debate on an exhibition of homage to Wilhelm II by the artists of Berlin (at Manzel's suggestion); Anniversary Medal (pp. 68f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1912: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Engel, Kampf, Koepping, Scheurenberg.<br />9 Dec. 1912: Constitution of the committee, co-optation of members of the cooperative; Hertel exhibition; resolution: no sale of photographs in the exhibitions; exhibitions about Wallot and O. Lessing; Anniversary exhibition: rejection of the exhibition of drawings by Kallmorgen (pp. 72f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1913: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Engel, Liebermann, Kayser, Koepping, Scheurenberg.<br />22nd Jan. 1913: Anniversary exhibition: concept for the exhibition, renovation of the exhibition halls, Hoffmann's request for his own space within the exhibition, March's opera house design and the possible exhibition of the other opera house designs (Bl. 73f.).<br />21 Oct. 1913: Constitution of the committee, election of Koepping as deputy chairman, co-optation of members of the cooperative; proposals: Exhibition about Leibl and his circle, member exhibition (p. 76).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1914: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Engel, Jacob, Janensch, Kampf, Kayser, Klimsch, Liebermann, Schaper, Seeling.<br />17th Febr. 1914: Draft of regulations for the exhibitions of the academy; list of suggestions for the guests of the next member exhibition (e.g. Corinth, Trübner, Kuehl, Sterl, Kolbe, Barlach, Zürcher); proposals for collective exhibitions: Koepping, Anton v. Werner, v. Uhde, v. Bartels; rejection of a memorial exhibition for Friedrich Martersteig; no consent to an international art exhibition of female artists (Bl. 77).<br />Dec. 14, 1914: Constitution of the committee and election of Otto H. Engel as deputy chairman; co-optation of cooperative members; planned academy exhibition (p. 78).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1915: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Engel, Hoffmann, Hübner, Jacob, Janensch, Kallmorgen, Kampf, Kayser, Klimsch, Liebermann, Schaper, Schwechten, Seeling.<br />28th Jan. 1915: Preparation of an Anton v.-Werner exhibition; member exhibition (p. 79).<br />15 Febr. 1915: no event of a v.-Werner exhibition on the advice of Wilhelm II; proposals for the members' exhibition, list of guests to be invited, including Corinth, Orlik, Baluschek, Kolbe (pp. 80f.).<br />16 June 1915: constitution of the committee, assumption of the chairmanship by Manzel, co-optation of members of the cooperative; advice on proposals for the purchase of works of art (pp. 80f.); proposal for the purchase of works of art (pp. 80f.). 82).<br />Dec. 9, 1915: Election of Major Schweitzer to the commission as representative of the army for the planned exhibition of war paintings, consultation on the regulations for this exhibition (Bl. 82).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1916: Schwechten, Amersdorffer, Engel, Herrmann, Liebermann.<br />29 Dec. 1916: Constitution of the committee and co-optation of members of the cooperative; proposals for exhibitions in 1917: Alfred-Rethel-, Schwarz-Weiß-, Kriegsbilder- und Türkische Ausstellung (Bl. 84).<br />Participants in meetings in 1917: Schwechten, Amersdorffer, Engel, Herrmann, Hoffmann, Hübner, Janensch, Kallmorgen, Liebermann, Manzel, Major Schweitzer.<br />17 Jan. 1917: Recommendation: renouncement of the planned black-and-white exhibition in favor of a comprehensive Rethel exhibition (p. 84).<br />7 March 1917: postponement of the Rethel exhibition to a point in time after the end of the war; co-optation of Schweitzer to the committee; approval of the regulations for the exhibition of German, Austro-Hungarian, and Bulgarian war pictures (p. 84). 85).<br />Participants in meetings in 1919: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Bestelmeyer, Engel, Franck, Geyger, Kampf, Klimsch, Liebermann, Looschen, Makowsky, Starck.<br />Febr. 1, 1919: Decision to extend the circle of participating artists as far as possible, list of guests to be invited (including Hans Purrmann, Emil R. Weiß, Magnus Zeller, Oskar Kokoschka, Max Pechstein, Emil Orlik, Buno Paul, Paul Mebes, Alfred Breslauer, Peter Behrens; addresses, notes, sheets, etc.). 85f.).<br />14 March 1919: Preparation of the 1919 exhibition: list of guests to be invited, additions to the exhibition commission, proposals for special exhibitions: Tuaillon, Friese, arts and crafts department after consultation with Bruno Paul, for a graphics department possibly with the participation of Käthe Kollwitz, no invitation from architects (pp. 86f.).<br />2 Apr. 1919: Preparation of the exhibition 1919: addition to the guest list, including Heckel, Kirchner, Franz Marc; proposals for special exhibitions: Tuaillon, Friese, Lehmbruck, Dora Hitz, architecture exhibition, determination of studio visits with the intended guests for the selection of the works of art (pp. 87f.).<br />29 Apr. 1919: preparation of the exhibition 1919, invitation of further guests; proposal: portrait exhibition in Nov. 1919 (pp. 88f.).<br />20 Sept. 1919: for the transfer of exhibition rooms to former soldiers; exhibition of portraits; theatre exhibition (pp. 89f.).<br />27 Oct. 1919: exhibition of portraits, including works by Anton Graff from the possession of the Academy as well as works from the possession of Liebermann (pp. 90).<br />Nov. 3, 1919: Cooptation of the director of the portrait department of the National Gallery, Mackowsky, into the exhibition commission; specifications for the exhibition of portraits (p. 91).<br />Nov. 13, 1919: Exhibition of portraits (p. 91f.).<br />Nov. 20, 1919: Exhibition of portraits, et al. Liebermann's suggestion not to exhibit contemporary works (pp. 92f.).<br />December 1, 1919: Definition of the portrait exhibition: no contemporary artists, modern portraits as part of the spring exhibition 1920; new lighting in the exhibition rooms (pp. 92f.). 93).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1920: Manzel, Amersdorffer, Engel, Franck, Geyger, Hoffmann, Kampf, Klimsch, Lederer, Liebermann, Looschen, Mackowsky, Seeck, Starck, Bräuning; Jessen and Freudenberg from the Association of Model Industrialists.<br />11 Febr. 1920: Portrait exhibition (p. 94).<br />24 March 1920: Portrait exhibition; members' exhibition autumn 1920; members' tour of the exhibitions in Düsseldorf, Munich and Dresden (p. 96).<br />21 Febr. 1920: Portrait exhibition (p. 94).<br />21 March 1920: Portrait exhibition; members' exhibition autumn 1920; members' tour of the exhibitions in Düsseldorf, Munich and Dresden (p. 96).<br />21 Febr. 1920: Portrait exhibition (p. 94).<br />21 March 1920: Members' exhibition autumn 1920; members' tour of the exhibitions in Düsseldorf, Munich and Dresden (p. 96).<br />21 Febr />11 Febr />11 />21 Febr />11 />11. June 1920: Member exhibition; visit of various foreign exhibitions; architecture exhibition; black-and-white exhibition spring 1921; theatre exhibition (page 97f.).<br />7 July 1920: guests for the autumn exhibition (list of names); architecture exhibition in spring 1921 (page 99f.).<br />14 July 1920: Liebermann's proposals for the reorganization of the exhibitions in the academy (jury, relationship to modernism, etc.); autumn exhibition, etc: Members of the exhibition commission as jury; Architecture exhibition (pp. 101-103).<br />21 July 1920: Autumn exhibition (press release, programme, admission requirements, schedule; pp. 104).<br />15 Sept. 1920: Exemption from the luxury tax at academic exhibitions; invitations to artists to send out items to the autumn exhibition (including Max Beckmann, Heckel, Hofer, Walser); exhibition 'Farbe und Mode' ('Colour and Fashion') of the Verband der Mode-Industriellen ('Association of Model Industrialists'); request to exhibit works from the estate of Max Klinger (Bl. 105f.).<br />22 Sept. 1920: Approval of the exhibition 'Colour and Fashion', if artistic aspects are decisive; further guests for the autumn exhibition, e.g. Schmidt-Rottluff and Partikel (Bl. 107).<br />7 Oct. 1920: Approval of the exhibition 'Colour and Fashion', if artistic aspects are decisive; further guests for the autumn exhibition, e.g. Schmidt-Rottluff and Partikel (Bl. 107).<br />7 Oct. 1920: Approval of the exhibition 'Colour and Fashion', if artistic aspects are decisive; further guests for the autumn exhibition, e.g. Schmidt-Rottluff and Partikel (Bl. 107).<br />7 Oct. 1920: Approval of the exhibition 'Colour and Fashion', if artistic aspects are decisive; further guests for the autumn exhibition, e.g. Schmidt-Rottluff and Partikel (Bl. 107). 1920: Autumn exhibition, further invitations, exposé (pp. 108f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1921: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Bestelmeyer, Dettmann, Engel, Gaul, Geyger, Franck, Hoffmann, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Lederer, Looschen, Slevogt, Starck.<br />7th Jan. 1921: New constitution of the committee, retirement of Manzel, Bestelmeyer, Jaeckel, election of Gaul, Dettmann, Kollwitz; black-and-white exhibition, programme; suggestion by Slevogt: exhibition of stage designs (p. 110).<br />7th Febr. 1921: Non-members to be invited to the black-and-white exhibition, list of names, separated according to artists who were represented at the autumn exhibition 1920 and other artists, e.g. George Grosz, Paul Klee, de Fiori (pp. 110f.).<br />14 March 1921: Black-and-white exhibition, e.g. of drawings by Max Klinger; list of names of non-members to be invited (Alfred Kubin, Emy Roeder-Garbe, among others); exhibition on architecture in landscape and cityscape (pp. 112f.).<br />30 March 1921: black-and-white exhibition, et al. Drawings by Max Klinger; notes on the participants in the exhibition, rejection of Heckel's participation; no catalogue (pp. 114f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1922: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Hübner, Franck, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Lederer, Looschen, Slevogt, Starck.<br />19th Jan. 1922: Election of Georg Kolbe (for the late August Gaul), co-optation of Eichhorst; spring exhibition: programme, schedule, list of names of non-members to be invited, including Christian Rohlfs, Friedrich Ahlers-Hestermann, Karl Albiker, Renée Sintenis; proposal by Liebermann: memorial exhibition for Gaul (Bl. 115-117).<br />6 March 1922: Memorial exhibition for Gaul in collaboration with Paul Cassirer, autumn 1922; rejection of an application by Eberlein to organize a collective exhibition; spring exhibition, further guests (Bl. 118).<br />Apr. 3, 1922: Spring exhibition (further participants, timetable, catalogue production questionable); Gaul memorial exhibition (pp. 119f.).<br />Dec. 21, 1922: rejection of a Curt-Kroner exhibition; Spring exhibition 1923: timetable, admission requirements (e.g. re-admission of free submissions), exhibition rooms, list of names of non-members to be invited (e.g. Rudolf Levy), programme, selling prices, difficulties in producing a catalogue, exhibition advertising, including the erection of flagpoles (pp. 122f.).<br />Participants in the 1923 meetings: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hofer, Hoffmann, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Lederer, Slevogt, Starck.<br />19 Febr. 1923: Election of Hofer to the commission (instead of the deceased Looschen); Looschen memorial exhibition; sending of the spring exhibition; letter Kallmorgens; exhibition of Berlin art in Nuremberg; academy exhibition in Dresden (Bl. 124).<br />5 March 1923: Spring exhibition (further non-members, e.g. Munch, Dix and Wilhelm Schmid); exhibitions in Nuremberg and Dresden (p. 125).<br />19 March 1923: Spring exhibition (further guests, e.g. Munch, Dix and Wilhelm Schmid).<br />19 March 1923: Spring exhibition (further guests, e.g. Munch, Dix and Wilhelm Schmid).a. Charlotte Berend-Corinth (pp. 125f.).<br />26. March 1923: Spring exhibition (flagpoles, participants; pp. 126).<br />9. Apr. 1923: Spring exhibition (pp. 127).<br />26. June 1923: Reconstruction of the sculpture halls; exhibition in Nuremberg; exhibition of Berlin art in Dresden; exhibition of Italian paintings of the 17th and 18th centuries; black-and-white exhibition; Hungarian exhibition (pp. 128f.).<br />28th Aug. 1923: black-and-white exhibition, with list of names; graphic exhibition in Berlin in connection with artists of the Ruhr area (pp. 131f.).<br />14th Dec. 1923: Kruse's works in the spring exhibition (pp. 132).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1924: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hofer, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kolbe, Kollwitz, Lederer, Pechstein, Starck.<br />10. Jan. 1924: Spring exhibition: Admission of free entries, list of non-members to be invited (Bl. 133f.).<br />8 Febr. 1924: Spring exhibition: spatial distribution of collective exhibitions, to different participants (p. 136).<br />9 Apr. 1924: Spring exhibition: to different participants, evt. No production of catalogues (sheet 136).<br />27 June 1924: Black and white exhibition in autumn 1924, within this exhibition a section with representatives of modern architecture (among others Poelzig, Behrens, Mendelsohn, Mies van der Rohe, Luckhardt), inclusion of watercolours in the black-and-white exhibition, collective exhibitions by Dix, Walser, Albiker, Munch, Zille among others; list of names of artists invited without jury (pp. 137f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1925: Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hofer, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Kraus, Liebermann, Paul, Poelzig, Seeck, Slevogt, Starck, Schüler.<br />12 Jan. 1925: Exhibition of Italian Art; Spring Exhibition, List of Jury-free Invited Artists (Bl. 139f.).<br />13 Febr. 1925: exhibitions of Italian art and American architecture, Christian-Bernhard-Rode exhibition; exhibition of old Dutch paintings from Goudstikker's collection; spring exhibition, etc.a. Proposal by Hofer: Invitation of the November Group (pp. 141f.).<br />6 March 1925: Spring exhibition, including participation of the Munich New Secession, invitation of members of the Berlin Secession Hans Gerson and Josef Oppenheimer; exhibition of old Dutch paintings from Goudstikker's estate; preparation of the Thoma exhibition (pp. 143).<br />7 Aug. 1925: Corinth exhibition, collaboration with Corinth's widow; black-and-white exhibition, and others. List of names of guests to be invited; cancellation of the Goudstikker exhibition; group exhibition of Austrian artists; collection of Munich artists; Swedish exhibition (pp. 144f.).<br />24th Aug. 1925: Corinth exhibition; black and white exhibition, list of names of guests to be invited; exhibition of American architecture; Swedish exhibition (pp. 146f.).<br />15th Dec. 1925: exhibition of New American Architecture, inspiration and compilation of materials by pupils (pp. 148f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1926: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Bertling, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, E. Hancke, Hofer, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kraus, Pechstein, Poelzig, Schüler, Seeck, Starck, Wach.<br />4 Jan. 1926: Exhibition of New American Architecture: supporting programme, formation of a working committee, design of the catalogue (p. 150).<br />5 Febr. 1926: Spring exhibition, etc. Liebermann's proposal to present a collection of masterpieces of older painting within the exhibition; Corinth exhibition; exhibition of designs for the Cologne skyscraper project; Picasso exhibition at the Nationalgalerie (pp. 151f.).).<br />12 Febr. 1926: Spring exhibition, list of names of artists to be invited jury-free (pp. 153f.).<br />23 March 1926: Spring exhibition, including the collection of masterpieces from the second half of the 19th century (pp. 155f.).<br />23 Febr. July 1926: Autumn exhibition, list of names of artists to be invited free of jury; decision: reporting to the members on the results of the exhibitions; exhibition of Wrages Dante woodcuts (pp. 157f.).<br />1 Nov. 1, 1926; exhibition of Wrages Dante woodcuts (pp. 157f.). 1926: to the exhibition of Thoma-Graphik; rejection of an exhibition of Dutch graphics; black-and-white exhibition (pp. 159f.).<br />11 Dec. 1926: Liebermann exhibition, oil paintings and sketches, list of proposed works (pp. 161).<br />17 Dec. 1926: Approval of the list of works for the Liebermann exhibition (sheet 162).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1927: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hancke, Hofer, Hoffmann, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Kraus, Pechstein, Starck, Feilchenfeldt, Krecker, Schomann.<br />6. Jan. 1927: Thoma-Graphik-Ausstellung (Bl. 163).<br />27. Jan. 1927: Spring exhibition, lists of artists to be invited jury-free and non-jury-free, further invitations, e.g. L. Ury, Nolde (pp. 163-165).<br />11 March 1927: Preparation of the Liebermann exhibition, difficulties with lenders; spring exhibition (pp. 166f.).<br />2 Apr. 1927: on the inclusion of Hugo Vogel's portrait of the President of the Reich Court Simons in the exhibition (pp. 166f.). 168).<br />Apr. 7, 1927: Rejection of the exhibition of Hugo Vogel's portrait of the President of the Reich Court Simons (p. 169).<br />May 16, 1927: Liebermann exhibition; honors to Liebermann's 80th birthday Birthday, exhibitions of Liebermann's pastels by Bruno Cassirer, of Liebermann's drawings and graphics by Paul Cassirer (pp. 170f.).<br />8 July 1927: Renovation of the exhibition rooms, determination of the materials and colours to be used, outline sketch for the installation of the doors (pp. 172).<br />27 July 1927: Autumn exhibition, including a collective exhibition by Käthe Kollwitz, debate with Liebermann about Nolde's invitation, list of names of guests to be invited; structural changes: Relocation of the doors in the exhibition halls (pp. 173-176).<br />23 Aug. 1927: Renovation of the exhibition halls; change of the admission requirements for exhibitions: in future only distinction between academy members and guests, renunciation of the designation 'jury-free', correspondence on the rejection of Vogel's portrait of Simons; autumn exhibition, various applications for the organisation of collective exhibitions, addition to the guest list, including Schrimpf (pp. 177f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1928: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Bruno Cassirer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kraus, Pechstein, Starck, Solmssen, Jung.<br />11 Jan. 1928: Correspondence on the rejection of H. Vogel's portrait of Simons; co-optation of Georg Kolbe into the commission; Austrian graphics exhibition; spring exhibition, including proposals for collective exhibitions by Hagemeister, Zille, inclusion of competition works for the State Prize, foundation of prizes for painters and sculptors at the academy exhibition, list of names of guests to be invited (Bl. 179-181).<br />8 Febr. 1928: Schönleber exhibition; Albrecht-Dürer exhibition; spring exhibition; Kolbe rejects cooperation in the commission (pp. 182f.).<br />5 March 1928: spring exhibition, et al. State awards granted for the exhibition, medals awarded; exhibition of Swedish 18th century painting; Meurer exhibition; promotion of the academy exhibitions by a financially strong circle of friends; foundation of prizes for private exhibitions (sheet 184f.).<br />30. Apr. 1928: Advice on the participants in the spring exhibition, report on the donated prizes; debate on the provision of academy rooms for an exhibition of Bavarian art by the Munich Secession (Bl. 186f.).<br />23. May 1928: Proposals for award winners of private foundations in the spring exhibition (George Grosz, Erich Waske, Alfred Partikel, Otto Freytag, Hans Joachim Lau, Max Neumann, Ernst Wilhelm Nay); founding of a society for the promotion of art at the suggestion of Max Liebermann (Bl. 188f.).<br />19 July 1928: Cooptation of Bruno Cassirer into the exhibition commission; Slevogt exhibition (pp. 190f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1929: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Engel, Franck, Hoffmann, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kraus, Pechstein, Starck, Director Drescher, Kommerzienrat Gugenheim.<br />30 Jan 1929: Exhibition of Chinese Art; Life and Knaus Exhibition; Collective Exhibitions within the Spring Exhibition, List of Names of Guests to Invite; Poelzig Exhibition (Bl. 192-194).<br />3 Apr. 1929: Leibl exhibition, definition; Poelzig exhibition; spring exhibition, list of further guests to be invited; exhibition of the State Collection for German Ethnology at the Academy; Knaus exhibition; spring exhibition 1930; Schmutzer exhibition; erection of flagpoles in front of the Academy (sheet 196-198).<br />3 May 1929: Spring Exhibition; Lighting in the Exhibition Rooms (pp. 199f.).<br />28 June 1929: Laureates of Private Foundations at the Spring Exhibition (E. L. Kirchner and Xaver Fuhr, Erich Geiseler and Richard Martin Werner; pp. 201f.).<br />2 Aug. 1929: Ludwig Knaus Memorial Exhibition; Graf Kalckreuth Exhibition; Poelzig Exhibition; Rembrandt Exhibition; State Prize Exhibition; Autumn Exhibition, list of names of guests to be invited without jury (pp. 203f.).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1930: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Breslauer, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hoffmann, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Kraus, Pechstein, Seeck, Starck.<br />10th Jan. 1930: Spring exhibition 1930, list of names of guests to be invited without jury, applications for collective exhibitions, e.g. Klimsch, Ludwig Cauer; exhibition of Philipp Franck's watercolours; exhibition of Pechstein's glass paintings for a bathing establishment built by Tessenow; exhibition of the Max Böhm Collection; exhibition of Seché's graphic works (Bl. 205-210).<br />21 March 1930: Spring exhibition; exhibition of the Max Böhm Collection; Daumier exhibition; exhibition on Orlik and his school; participation of the Academy in the exhibition 'Altes Berlin. Foundations of the Metropolis'; Poelzig exhibition; exhibition of modern Japanese painting 1931; international exhibition of the Carnegie Institute; Goethe exhibition (Kippenberg Collection, Leipzig; pp. 211-213).<br />11 Nov. 1930: Debate on the proposal to organise an architecture exhibition 1931; debate on the artists to be invited to the spring exhibition 1931, and on the artists to be invited to the spring exhibition 1931.a. Munch, Hofer, Kolbe, Belling; discussion with the art dealer Flechtheim (pp. 214-216).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1931: Liebermann, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Franck, Hübner, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Kraus, Pechstein, Slevogt, Starck.<br />20 Febr. 1931: Spring exhibition, list of names of guests to be invited without jury, collective exhibitions, including Emil Orlik exhibition, Poelzig exhibition; architecture exhibition; German-Danish exhibition; Frank Lloyd Wright exhibition; Erna Frank memorial exhibition (pp. 217-221).<br />11 March 1931: Spring exhibition, collective exhibitions, list of names of invited guests, including Marcks (pp. 222-224).<br />18 Apr. 1931: Laureates of private foundations at the spring exhibition (Meyboden, Wieschebrink, Peiffer Watenphul, Schade and Jenny Wiegmann Mucchi (pp. 225).<br />24 July 1931: Autumn exhibition, lists of names of guests to be invited (pp. 226-228).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1932: Franck, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Engel, Kampf, Klimsch, Kollwitz, Starck.<br />15 June 1932: Autumn exhibition, u.a. Kollektivausstellung Ulrich Hübner, Namensliste des Einladungden Gäste; rejection of the application for an exhibition of modern school sign teaching in the Academy (pp. 229-233).<br />5th Sept. 1932: Autumn exhibition, Hübner collective exhibition, opening speech by Liebermann, fixing of admission prices; title of the spring exhibition (pp. 234-236).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1933: Franck, Amersdorffer, Dettmann, Eichhorst, Engel, Klimsch, Kollwitz (until 9th century). Febr. 1933), Kraus, Pechstein, Starck.<br />9 Febr. 1933: Spring and autumn exhibition, including Slevogt memorial exhibition, list of names of guests to be invited for the spring exhibition (pp. 237-240).<br />27 March 1933: Spring exhibition, determination: Exclusion of Jewish artists from the exhibition, communication to Büttner, Großmann, Levy, Meidner, Tappert, Wollheim, Josef Steiner, Jankel Adler, Klee, Schroetter, Feibusch, Radziwill, Isenstein, Moissej Kogan, Sopher, from sending in their works; no exhibitions of works by the architect Kreis and landscape sketches by Steinhausen (Bl. 241f.).<br />24 Apr. 1933: Resignation of Philipp Franck as chairman of the exhibition commission and chairman of the department for the fine arts; co-optation of further commission members instead of Franck, Hübner and Kollwitz); spring exhibition (Bl. 243).<br />4. May 1933: Inquiry for 'Aryan descent' at senders for the spring exhibition (sheet 244).<br />8. Aug. 1933: Exhibition of cartons by Peter v. Cornelius instead of the autumn exhibition (sheet 245).<br />Enth. et al: Provisions for the Standing Committees of the Royal Academy of Arts, List of Members 1910/11 (pp. 23f., 29f.), 1911/12 (pp. 32f., 36f., 66f.), 1912/13 (pp. 70f., 75), 1913/14, 1915/16 (pp. 16-18), 1916/17 (pp. 83), 1920 (pp. 95). Regulations for the exhibition of the Akademie der Künste, each spring 1923, 1924, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931 (pp. 121, 135, 183, 195, 210, 221); program for the black and white exhibition of the Akademie der Künste zu Berlin 1923, 1927, 1931, 1932 (pp. 130, 176, 228, 233). Outline sketch of the exhibition halls 3 to 7 of the Academy, 1927 (pp. 172).<br />Enth. also: Letter from Schadow to Minister v. Altenstein, 9 June 1832 (transcript), on the establishment of a department for musical composition (pp. 4-11).<br />Protocols of the meetings of the Committee for Awards:<br />Participants in the meetings in 1910: Kampf, v. Groszheim, Amersdorffer, Friedrich, Gernsheim, H. Herrmann, Humperdinck, Janensch, Kayser, Mohn, Skarbina.<br />25 Febr. 1910: Consultation on the awarding of the professor's title to Feddersen, Jessen, W. Kuhnert, the professor and Baurat title to the architect Schaedler; decree of 7 Dec. 1909 (p. 19).<br />26 Apr. 1910: Rejection of the award of the title of professor to Klein-Chevalier, endorsement of Carl Ludwig Jessen (p. 20).<br />23. May 1910: Advocating the award of the title of professor of the King of Württemberg to the sculptor Bredow (p. 21).<br />1 June 1910: Rejection of the award of the title of professor to Albert Manthe (p. 21).<br />29 June 1910: Rejection of the award of the title of professor to the Berlin painters Willi Döring and Mattschaß (p. 22).<br />28 Oct. 1910: Members of the committee 1910/11, constitution of the committee and election of the chairman; no endorsement of the award of the title of professor to Adolf Hering, advice on an award for Georg Noack, Berlin, no endorsement of the award of the title of professor to the painter Hugo Ulbrich and the architect Paul Mebes (Berlin); adjournment of the advice on a proposal for a knight of the order Pour le mérite für Wissenschaften und Künste as successor to the musician Auguste Gevaert (Bl. 25-27).<br />Participants in the meetings in 1911: Kampf, Amersdorffer, Janensch, Kiesel, Manzel, Schwechten.<br />10 May 1911: Award of the royal Saxon professorial title to the painter Woldemar v. Reichenbach, no endorsement of the award of the professorial title to the painter Langer as well as to the sculptors Nikolaus Friedrich and Rusche (pp. 28f.).<br />20. Sept. 1911: Constitution of the committee, election of Manzel as chairman; no endorsement of the award of the title of professor to the sculptors Menter and Richter; no endorsement of the award of the title of professor to the painter Jüttner; no decision for the architect Laur (p. 34).<br />Protocols of the meetings of the committee for elections:<br />19 Oct. 1910 (v. Groszheim, Amersdorffer, Janensch, Scheurenberg, Schwechten): Members of the committee 1910/11, constitution of the committee and election of Scheurenberg as chairman; proposals for the elections of the eight members and three deputies for the Landeskunstkommission; successors for the deceased members Skarbina and Friedrich in the committees for general affairs and academic exhibitions (Bl. 31, 35).<br />8 July 1911 (Scheurenberg, Janensch, Koepping, G. Koch, Kampf): Proposals for substitute elections for the standing committees 1911/12 (p. 35).<br />10. June 1912 (Kampf, Janensch): Proposals for replacement elections for the standing committees 1912/13 (p. 38).<br />27 June 1913 (Manzel, Meyerheim, Schaper, Rüfer, Amersdorffer): Proposals for new elections for the standing committees (p. 39).

History of the Inventory Designer: Georg von Müller, Admiral Born on 24 March 1854 in Chemnitz, died on 18 April 1940 in Hangelsberg November 1889 Married Elisabeth Luise von Montbart; March 1900 Elevated to hereditary nobility Military career (selection) May 1871: Entry into the Imperial Navy; August 1878: Appointment as lieutenant at sea; May 1879: Commanded torpedo weapon; 1882-1884: Travels abroad to West India and South America on S.M.S. "Olga" and S.M.S. "Blücher"; November 1884: Statistical Office of the Admiralty; May 1885 - March 1886: Military Political Advisor (Marine Attaché) at the German Embassy in Stockholm; March 1886: Promotion to lieutenant captain; until spring 1889: changing uses on board and on land, including participation in the company in Samoa in Aug./Sept. 1887 on board S.M.S. "Bismarck"; spring 1889: entry into the newly created Imperial Naval Cabinet; September 1891: Commander gunboat S.M.S. "Iltis"; November 1892: Head of Personnel in the High Command of the Navy; Autumn 1895 - February 1898: Personal Adjutant of Prince Heinrich of Prussia; November 1898: Commander of the Great Cruiser S.M.S. "Germany"; April 1899: Chief of the Staff Ostasiatisches Kreuzergeschwader; May 1899: Promotion to Captain at Sea; April 1900: Head of Department in the Navy Cabinet; October 1902 - September 1904: Commander Linienschiff S.M.S. "Wettin"; September 1904: Duty wing adjutant of Kaiser Wilhelms II; 1905: Appointment as rear admiral; July 1906: Head of Imperial Naval Cabinet; 1907: Appointment as vice-admiral; 1910: Appointment as admiral, also general adjutant of Kaiser Wilhelms II.November 1918: Farewell to active service Description of the inventory: As head of the naval cabinet, Georg Alexander von Müller had the opportunity to exert far-reaching influence on all naval affairs beyond his duties as head of personnel policy. His key position was based, on the one hand, on a special, personal relationship of trust with the Emperor and, on the other hand, on the fact that all personnel decisions of the Navy were in his hands and that Müller was called in for all lectures. Müller served as a link between the Emperor and the various Immediate Offices of the Navy. During the war, Müller increasingly met with reservations and criticism from the Naval Corps of Officers for the widespread view that the head of the Naval Cabinet delayed or blocked measures for a more aggressive naval war. Müller also entered into a permanent conflict with Grand Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz and was publicly attacked by him and his followers during and especially after the war. Although Müller, in contrast to numerous other members of the Naval Corps, did not publish any memoirs, a whole series of published articles from Müller's pen testifies to this permanent conflict. Müller's influence on naval affairs in general and on warfare in particular declined as a function of the importance of Kaiser Wilhelm II. As Supreme Warlord. In October 1918, Müller was largely on the fringes of the project of a militarily senseless, but myth-founding sacrificial corridor of the deep-sea fleet. As the duty wing adjutant of Wilhelm II and chief of the naval cabinet, Georg Alexander von Müller belonged to the immediate circle of Wilhelm II for more than a decade and a half and throughout the First World War. His records reflect in a special way the court society as well as the personality and work of the monarch in the last years of the German Empire. Content characterisation: The collection comprises only the seven handwritten diaries of Georg Alexander von Müller. They extend over a period of 47 years, beginning with Müller's entry into the Imperial Navy in 1871 up to his retirement as Chief of the Naval Cabinet in 1918. The records are enriched with photos and drawings. Other documents from the estate edited by Walter Görlitz and his son Sven von Müller, on the other hand, are considered lost. Citation style: Barch, N 159/...

Inventory Description: The Naval Airship Department was established by Allerhöchste Kabinettsordre on 3 May 1913 from the "Aviation Personnel of the Imperial Navy" next to the Naval Airship Department as an independent department with the temporary location Johannisthal. (1) The commanders of the departments were given "judicial, disciplinary and leave powers". In all training and technical matters, both departments were under the control of the State Secretary of the Reichsmarineamt, in all others of the inspection of coastal artillery and mines, as well as the head of the "North Sea Naval Station". (1) The State Secretary of the Reich Naval Office, Grand Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz, established 1 June as the day of formation by order of 8 May 1913. (2) As early as April 1912, members of the navy, including Corvette Captain Friedrich Metzing, were commanded for training at Deutsche Luftschifffahrts-AG. The airship command was subordinated on 15 July 1912 under the designation "Luftschiff-Detachement" with the Johannisthal site near Berlin Metzing as commander. (3) After the death of the commander of the naval airship department Friedrich Metzing in the accident of "L 1" on 9 September 1913, Corvette Captain Peter Strasser became his successor. Responsibility for the airship sector in the navy lay with the BX "Luftschiff- und Fliegerwesen" department of the shipyard department of the Reichsmarineamt formed on 12 October 1912. On 1 April 1913 an organisational change followed: Department BX was restructured to become the "Aviation Section" (Section BX with Divisions BXa and BXb). (4) At the beginning of the First World War, the command structure of the Naval Airship Division changed. By the Most High Cabinet Order of 29 August 1914, the office "Commander of the Aviation Departments" was created as the highest central command post of the entire naval aviation. (5) The Naval Airship Department and the Naval Aircraft Department were subordinated to this. The cabinet order assigned the following tasks to the new commander: Provision and training of personnel, management of schooling outside departments, test drives and maintenance of aircraft operational capability. The Most High Cabinet Order of May 1, 1916 assigned the naval airship division Cuxhaven (Nordholz) as a new location and divided the division into airship troops. (6) On November 23, 1916, the Naval Aviation Departments were divided into the Airship and Aircraft divisions by the Most High Cabinet Order. (7) The post of Commander of the Naval Aviation Divisions was transformed into Commander of the Naval Aviation Division and the Commander of the Naval Airship Division was elevated to "Chief of Naval Airships". The newly appointed Naval Airship Leader was in charge of the Naval Airship Division and the Naval Airships. The newly created position was subordinate to the command of the high seas armed forces in "matters of use and training of the North Sea front airships, to the State Secretary of the R e i c h s m a r i n e a m t , in technical and experimental matters and in matters of the school and experimental airships, and in all other matters to the naval station command of the North Sea". (7) For the airships deployed in the Baltic Sea, a new "Airship Ladder East" was formed as division commander. (7) The latter acted independently or according to the orders of the Commander-in-Chief of the Baltic Sea, but remained subordinate to the Commander of the Naval Airships. (8) The post of Airship Manager East was vacated in November 1917 due to staff shortages and the cessation of airship operations in the Baltic Sea. (9) This structure remained in place until the end of the war. After Strasser's death in the "L 70" on 5 August 1918, the post of commander of the naval airships was not reoccupied. (10) Due to the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles to abandon military aviation in Germany, the Naval Airship Department was dissolved in Nordholz on 10 December 1920. (11) During the First World War, naval airships were used for reconnaissance in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, securing and supporting mine search units, sighting and reporting of enemy naval forces and mine barriers, reports on merchant shipping and for offensive voyages, in particular on Great Britain. Commander of the Naval Aviation Departments 29 August 1914 - 23 November 1916 Rear Admiral Otto Philipp Leader of the Naval Airships 23 November 1916 - 5 August 1918 Frigate Captain Peter Strasser from 5 August 1918 August 1918 unmanned (representative: Hans-Paul Werther) Airship Leader East 23 November 1916 - November 1917 Corvette Captain Hans Wendt Naval Airship Troops Status: May 1916 (12) I. Nordholz II. Fuhlsbüttel III. Ahlhorn IV. Hage V. Tondern VI. Seerappen VII. Seddin VIII. Düren IX. Wainoden Status: November 1918 (13) I. Nordholz III. Ahlhorn IV. Wittmundhaven V. Tondern VI. Seerappen VII. Seddin-Jeseritz XI. Wainoden Characterisation of the contents: The collection covers the period 1914 to 1938, with a focus on the deployment of the naval airship department in the First World War from 1914 to 1918. The records also include other provenances based on circulars and forwarded communications from other or superior agencies such as the Navy Admiral Staff, the Commander of the Reconnaissance Ships of the Baltic Sea or the Commanding General of the Air Force, etc. The collection is also available in German. The operations of the naval airships are reflected in the tradition. The focus is on the operational and enterprise files for the reconnaissance voyages in the North Sea and Baltic Sea as well as the attack voyages, especially in Great Britain. War diaries and orders are available on a large scale for this purpose. The war diaries were created for individual airships or naval airship troops. Further few file complexes are found to the organization and to the personnel of the naval airship department. The structure of the documents mainly consists of war diaries, orders (daily and departmental orders) and so-called driving reports of the numerous reconnaissance and attack drives. The trip reports contain information on the trip task, names of crew members, weather conditions, technical data and square maps with the marked route. In addition, there are radio messages (some encrypted), spark telegraphy bearings, weather and barometer maps and telegrams. The collection also includes photographs, press articles, technical drawings, sketches and a large number of maps. The overdelivery is not complete. Only the war records have survived. Documents from the pre-war and post-war periods may have been destroyed in the air archives in 1945. State of development: Online-Findbuch Vorarchivische Ordnung: Bestandsgeschichte After the end of the First World War, the documents of the disbanded naval services, including the Naval Airship Department, were collected in the War History Department of the Admiral Staff of the Navy (established on 15 February 1916) for the purpose of setting up a new naval archive. From 1919 the name of the naval archive was changed to "Head of the Institute for Naval History and Chairman of the Naval Archive". A second renaming took place on 22 January 1936 in "Kriegswissenschaftliche Abteilung der Marine". However, this did not belong to the Reichsarchiv, but was subject until 31 March 1934 to the Inspectorate of Naval Education, then to the Chief of Naval Management, and later as a subordinate authority to the Commander-in-Chief of the Kriegsmarine. During the First World War some war diaries (RM 116/185-199) were already forwarded to the admiral's staff of the Navy for information and were thus integrated into his written material, but are handed down in this inventory. During the Second World War, naval records were moved to Tambach Castle near Coburg on 22 November 1943. (14 ) After the end of the war, the archives were confiscated by US troops and taken to London. There the files were filmed on a large scale, combined into bundles, provided with consecutive F-numbers ("Faszikel", "File" or "Fach") and partly with a seven-digit number with the prefixed letters "PG" ("pinched from the Germans"). The archives were then handed over to the British Admiralty. In the 1960s, the marine files were returned to the Federal Republic of Germany as part of the process of returning files and were transferred to the Document Centre of the Military History Research Office in Freiburg i.Br. With the transfer of the Document Centre in 1968, which is based on the 1968 interministerial agreement between the Federal Ministry of Defence and the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the documents were transferred to the Federal Archives and Military Archives moved from Koblenz to Freiburg. In 1977 an access with a photo album to the naval airships (access number 2005/77) took place, which was transferred under RM 116/200 into the inventory. An LL signature (LL 410) refers to a storage in the air archive. A note in English on the file cover indicates a seizure by British and/or US troops. During the file repatriations, the photo album was also handed over to the Document Centre at the Military History Research Office, where it received an I L signature (I L (B) 11). (15 ) The tradition is not complete. A large part of the documents may have been transferred to the Luftarchiv at that time and destroyed in 1945. In 1936, the Luftwaffe set up its own archive under the name "Kriegswissenschaftliche Abteilung der Luftwaffe" (War Science Department of the Air Force) and collected the entire archives of the Air Forces of the Army and the Navy Air Forces. (16) It may have included parts of the naval airship department files, which would justify the small size of the file delivery. Archivische Bearbeitung A rough list of files was available on the holdings, which contained only imprecise file titles and durations as well as old signatures. An evaluation of the documents was not carried out due to the loss of written records and the resulting gaps in the records before 1945. The existing rules of procedure were retained. The documents had already been formed; most of them were in Prussian thread stitching, a small part in archive folders. The file structure is uneven; thus, in part, uniformly formed and coherent files were found for a task or an assignment. On the other hand, there were also documents with heterogeneous contents, such as aerial reconnaissance and attack drives. The inventory of the stock was carried out with the archive management system of the Federal Archives BASYS-S-2. The files were recorded and classified on the basis of the specified overdelivery due to a lack of organisational documents. The old signatures F and PG numbers as well as the file numbers were recorded. The terms "Detachement" and "Trupp", for the units subordinated to the Naval Airship Department, were not used uniformly in the files despite the same meaning. The collection contains numerous photographs and maps, the content of which is linked to the files and have therefore been left in their context. Only the oversized maps which were not sewn in due to damaged files were removed for conservation reasons and are now stored together in a map folder in the inventory under RM 116/201. The files are in a poor state of conservation. The damage ranges from dissolved thread stitching, mechanical damage as a result of use, to paper decay and ink corrosion. The collection needs to be restored soon. The stock is not completely foliated. Scope, explanation: Holdings without increase 7.4 linear metres 198 AU Citation method: BArch, RM 116/...

Contains: above all: Letters accompanying, notifying and responding to submissions, including Rheinbott, E. v. (Ponewiesch): Translations of Russian songs (1907, 1908); Schmidt, K. (Gleiwitz): Memorandum on parts of the Corpus Inscriptionum Etruscarum and Etruscan inscriptions (1907); Mac Donald, A. (Washington): A Plan for the Study of Man (1910); Thöne, J. (Wipperfürth): Article about efforts for a world language(1912) - inquiries, information and messages to the academy, among others: Jelinek, L. (Zdolbunow): Words to the participants of the third International Congress of the Friends of Philosophy in Heidelberg (1908); Institut d'Estudis Catalans (Barcelona): Announcement of a scholar to study the Fonctionnement de la ville (1909); Königliches Materialprüfungsamt (Berlin): Communication on a cellite process for the preservation of manuscripts (1909); Wirsen (Stockholm): Remembrance of proposals for the Nobel Prize for Literature (1910); Inquiry by the Royal Materials Testing Office about experimental results with the cellite process (1911); Exchange of letters on the inquiry by the B. Koenigsberger after the whereabouts of his work on the Jerusalem Talmud (1911); correspondence on the inquiry of H. Hübner (secretary of the Bibliotheca Hertziana Rome) about interest in the continuation of the work of Aldrovandi (1912); Dieterich, K. (Leipzig): Report about the behaviour of H. Jantsch on a trip to the Athos monasteries to photograph manuscripts (1912) - Accompanying letter and information about applications to the academy for financial support, including..: Geisenhof, G. (Lübeck): Publication of the Bugenhagen Editions (1906); Mayer, L. (Munich): Journey into the South Seas for research for a comparative dictionary of Polynesian main dialects (1907); Gall, A. v. (Mainz): Edition of the Hebrew Pentateuch of the Samaritans (1907); Teutonia-Verlag (Leipzig): Collection of texts by the Sette Comuni Vicentini (1907); Ruzicka (Berlin): The consonant dissimilation in Semitic languages (1907); Hallensleben, M. (Sondershausen): Publication of the contributions to the Schwarzenburg local history of T. Irmisch (1907); Patzak, B. (Klausen): villa life and construction of Italians in the 15th and 16th centuries (1908); Preuss, G. F. (Breslau): publication of the self-biography of Autoinede Lumbres (1908); Schillmann, F. (Marburg): photography of the main manuscript of the papal formula book of Marinus de Ebulo (1910); Kluge, T. (Kluge): "The life and construction of villas of the Italians in the 15th and 16th centuries" (1908); Preuss, G. F. (Breslau): publication of the self-biography of Autoinede Lumbres (1908); Schillmann, F. (Marburg): photography of the main manuscript of the papal formula book of Marinus de Ebulo (1910). (Berlin): Photography of ancient Georgian literary monuments on a trip to the Caucasus (1910); Glahn, L. (Ichendorf): Publication of the work Das doppelte Gesetz im Menschen auf der Basis der Kantischen Freiheitslehre (1910); Ruge, A. (The Double Law in Man on the Basis of the Kantian Doctrine of Liberty). (Heidelberg): International Bibliography of Philosophy (1911); Löwenthal, E. (Berlin): Publication of the results of research on naturalistic transcendentalism (1911); Stückelberg, E. A. (Basel): Die Heiligen der Lombardei, including: treatise San Lucio, the patron saint of alpine dairies (1911); Braungart, R. (Munich): Die Südgermanen (1912); Anspach, A. E. (Duisburg): Reise zur Kollationierung von Handschriften für eine Edition der Etymologien Isidors (1912).- Correspondence on applications to the academy for financial support, including..: Norddeutsche Missionsgesellschaft: Wörterbuch Ewe-Deutsch (1906); Sikora, A. (Mühlau): Forschungen zur Theater- und Kunstgeschichte (1906); Schliebitz, J. (Wittenberg): Publication of the Syrian-German edition of Išodâdh's Hiob-Kommentars (1906); Karst, T. (Strasbourg): Lexikon des Mittelarmenischen (1908); Korn (Berlin): Production of a work with reproductions of his collection of portraits of German lawyers (1908); Reichelt, H. (Gießen): New edition of Pahlavi-Vendidad (1908); Moeller, E. v. (Berlin): Biography of Hermann von Cornrings (1909); Staerk, D. A. (St. Petersburg): Monuments of the Latin Palaeography of St. Petersburg (1909); Fritz-Eckardt-Verlag (Leipzig): Complete Edition of Hegel's Works (1910); Walleser, M. (Kehl a. Rh.): Madhyamaka-Karika von Nagarjuna (1910); Reimer-Verlagsbuchhandlung (Berlin): Publication of the Formae orbis antiqui by H. Kiepert (1911); Molin, J. (Vienna): Treatise on the religious significance of Goethe and Schiller (1911); Neumann, A. (Berlin): Journey to England for research on the English interior colonization (1911); Fischel, O. (Berlin): Publication of a corpus of Raphael's drawings (1911); Horten, M. (Bonn): Publication of works on the philosophy of the Arabs (1912); Paul, E. (Bad Aussee): Work on Germanity in the Zimbernlande (1912); Verein für Reformationsgeschichte: Publication of a treatise on the origin of the Worms edict by Kalkoff (Breslau) (1912): Hesse (Brandenburg): examination of treatises on stenography (1907); Wulff, L. (Parchim): examination of the treatise Dekalog und Vaterunser (1908); Paul, H. (Wiesbaden): examination of the work Chronologische Zusammenstellung der Fabel poets verschiedener Zeiten und Sprachen (1908); Frank, F. (1908): examination of the work Chronologische Zusammenstellung der Fabeldichter verschiedener Zeiten und Sprachen (1908). (Hof): Examination of the work Die Mogastisburg, a linguistic contribution to history (1909); Tucher, M. v. (La Valette): Examination of the work Quelques particularités du dialecte arabe de Malte by B. Roudanovsky (1909); Strack, H. L. (1909). (Berlin): Subscription to the facsimile edition of the Monacensis des Talmud (1911); U. v. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff: Mediation of a photo permit for manuscripts from the monasteries Esphigmenu and Patmos (1911) - Expert opinion on applications to the Academy for financial support, including: Bergner, H. (Nischwitz): Studies on the systematic representation of German art antiquities (1908); Gesellschaft zur Beförderung der evangelischen Mission unter den Heiden (Berlin): Publication of the dictionary of Sotho by D. Endemann (Berlin) (1907); Beck, J. B. (Paris): Die Melodien der Troubadours (1909); Vandenhoff, B. (Münster): Publication of the work System des geistlichen und weltlichen Rechtes der Nestorianer (1910); Curschmann, F. (1909). (Greifswald): Plan for a historical atlas of the eastern provinces of the Prussian state and inclusion in the Academy's publications, including: Historische Vierteljahresschrift (1910); Flügel, O. (Döhlau): Gesamtausgabe der Werke Herbarts (1912) - Expert opinion on the request of v. Nordenflycht (Havanna) for examination of an alleged record of Charles V. in a Bible by C. F. Finlay (Havana) (1907) - expert opinion for the Ministry of Culture on Glaser's estate of South Arabian inscriptions and geographical materials (1908) - Mayer, L. (Munich): Information about a trip to the South Seas for research for a Samoan-German dictionary and request for formal commission by the Academy (1907) - Reprint of the letters of H. V. Hilprecht (Philadelphia) to the University of Philadelphia to resign his offices and to disregard his rights (1910).

History of the Inventor: Taking into account the goal of the new Reich government from 1933 to develop Germany into a power factor in the world, changes were also made to the structure of the Army Ordnance Office. Growing political tensions in Europe, the danger of an imminent war and the transformation of the previous Wehrmacht office into the High Command of the Wehrmacht as a result of Hitler's takeover of the Reich War Ministry also had an effect on the organisation of the Army Weapons Office. The departments of the office were changed into office groups, in order to do justice to the extended tasks to the war preparation. The attempt to reorganize the Army Weapons Office as the Wehrmacht Weapons Office was no longer successful in February 1945; this measure was taken only on paper, as the transfer of parts of the Army Weapons Office to northern and southern Germany had already begun. In order to implement the order, however, the office was removed from the subordination of the commander-in-chief of the reserve army and directly assigned to the chief of the army armament. The dissolution of the Wehrmacht Weapons Office began on April 27, 1945 on the orders of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Armament and was completed on May 2, 1945. The duties of the Amtsgruppen were as follows: Central Tasks Group (WaZ): The WaZ's activities covered all tasks of an economic and organisational nature that required uniform control or processing for the entire area of the Office. These included in particular issues of internal organisation, including the establishment of the staff budget, budgetary, contractual, price review and legal matters. Official Group for Development and Testing (WaPrüf): It received the requirements for the development and testing of new weapons, equipment and ammunition from the weapons inspections. These requirements were transformed into the corresponding technical requirements for the development of products at industrial companies, which were carried out under the leadership of WaA in close cooperation with them. The examination of proposals was carried out with regard to functional safety, simplification of production, use of materials of low quality, increase in performance of equipment, fundamental innovations (inventions). After the inspection, the manufactured objects were presented to the weapons inspectors for a decision with a corresponding expert opinion. The test took place at the test sites Kummersdorf, Sperenberg-Klausdorf, Grulich, Hillersleben, Rügenwalde, St. Johann in Tyrol, Mittersill and Berka, which are subordinate to the WaA. Chief Engineer (WaChefIng): The Chief Engineer was responsible for technical matters throughout the entire office. He was commissioned to take into account the latest achievements of technology and scientific knowledge in design and mass production. With the departments subordinate to him, he worked already during the development phase on the creation of faultless production documents. This also included monitoring the use of raw materials. Official Groups Industrial Armaments, Weapons and Equipment and Ammunition (WaIRüWuG and WaIRüMun): They prepared mass production in accordance with the requirements of the General Army Office (AHA) and placed orders with industry. The WaIRüWuG had to carry out the orders in peace according to the budget funds allocated for one year and to ensure a monthly performance required by the AHA in wartime. Official group acceptance (WaAbn): The weapons, equipment and ammunition were accepted by the WaAbn offices in the factories. The acceptance conditions were determined in close cooperation with the official groups WaPrüf and WaChefIng on the basis of the technical drawings and delivery conditions. The acceptance ranged from the conformity of the production dimensions with the drawing dimensions, material tests to the practical functional or bulletproof test. State institutions and also the technical universities were consulted to support the official group for the examinations. For the execution of the acceptance, the WaA was responsible for acceptance inspectors and acceptance commands. Research Department (WaF): It had to establish the connection with the other research institutions of the Reich as well as to carry out basic research and also research for specific purposes, as far as this could not be realized within the scope of the activities of other institutes. It had a research laboratory in Gottorp where, for example, the hollow charge was developed and made ready for use. Official group for flak development (GL/Flak-E): The GL/Flak-E was an official group of the Reich Aviation Ministry. She was responsible for the development of the anti-aircraft armament including the anti-aircraft tanks. Its head of the official group was subordinate to the head of the WaA until the creation of the "Chief of Technical Air Armament" office on 20 June 1944. Army Experimental Station Peenemünde As early as 1930, the Army Weapons Office was concerned with the use of the rocket motor for military purposes. The department for development and testing (WaPrüf) was expanded, as was the procurement department, and Group D of the testing department was set up as a department for special equipment with the later subordinate department Heimatartilleriepark 11 (Heeresversuchsstelle Peenemünde). In 1937, the Peenemünde Army Experimental Station was established, which was later called the Peenemünde Army Experimental Station, also known as the Peenemünde Army Experimental Station, and finally, for camouflage reasons, Homeland Artillery Park 11. In 1944, in the course of the mass production of the liquid rocket A4 (V 2), the company was converted into the private company Elektromechanische Werke GmbH, Karlshagen/Pomerania. The development of liquid missiles was the responsibility of a testing department (WaPrüf 11 ) at the Heereswaffenamt, also based in Peenemünde, which was responsible for the Heeresversuchsanstalt. Subordinate Offices These service stations, which are usually directly connected to the Army Weapons Office, had to test and accept weapons and equipment in accordance with the relevant specifications and, if necessary, submit proposals for modifications. As a result of this task, the test sites were mostly located in the immediate vicinity of military training areas and shooting ranges. Editing note: Cassations, including drawings of individual parts, other than redundancies, have been dispensed with. The documents of the Army Weapons Office were originally to be divided into the following individual stocks: - RH 8 I Heereswaffenamt - RH 8 II Heeresversuchsanstalt Peenemünde - RH 8 III Other subordinate agencies (experimental agencies, army inspection agencies, WaA Paris office and special representative OKH/WaA Italy at Army Group B) All files were, however, provisionally signed with "RH 8-I" (and a sequential number) in order to finally re-sign them later to the respective individual holdings. This was waived due to the expediency and in favour of the unity of the stock. The holdings now only bear the signature "RH 8-I", the holdings RH 8-II and RH 8-III are deleted. Citation style: BArch, RH 8/...

History of the Inventor: The Reichsmarineamt (Reichsmarineamt) was created as the successor authority to the Imperial Admiralty with effect from April 1, 1889, in the form of a cabinet order (in addition to the Navy Cabinet and the Navy High Command). As the supreme Reich authority, the Reichsmarineamt was responsible for the organisation, administration, technology, armament and fortification of the navy. At the same time, it exercised Reich competence vis-à-vis the merchant navy and in the fields of maritime transport, nautical science and fisheries protection. The RMA was in charge of the Imperial Shipyards, the Shipbuilding Inspection Commission, the Naval Depot Inspectorate, Coastal District Offices, Station Headquarters, Naval Military Sacrets, the Naval Observatory, the Naval Commissioner of the Kaiser Wilhelm Canal and the Kiautschou Government. The RMA was divided into the following organizational units: Central Department, General Navy Department, Shipyard Department/Submarine Office, Construction Department, Administrative Department, Weapons Department, Nautical Department, Kiautschou Protectorate Central Department, Medical Department, Justice Department, News Office. On 15 July 1919 the powers of the Reichsmarineamt were transferred to the Admiralty by decree of the Reich President. Characterisation of content: With the exception of the Arms Department, the Medical Department, the Legal Department and the Central Bureau of the Navy, all other organisational units in this inventory have files. Of particular importance from the Central Department are the State Secretary's files on the development of the Navy and the preparatory work for the Fleet Acts. An important part of the former hand files is also in the estate of State Secretary Tirpitz. The files handed down from the central department contain documents on protocol questions, launching, awarding of orders and central organisational matters as well as Reichstag material and a complete series of the "Allerhöchsten Kabinettsordres" for the navy from 1889 to 1918. The activities of the General Maritime Department on matters of organisation and service operation of ships and naval parts, personnel and replacement matters, questions of training in weapons service, uniforms, organisation of education, administration of justice, supply matters, military questions of ship construction and maritime law are well documented. The files of the Construction Department provide a source of considerable importance for the history of the navy and technology. This includes construction files for all heavy and medium-sized combat ships completed by 1914, as well as approx. 10,000 construction plans and other technical drawings for ships and boats. In addition, scientific research results on strength issues, material development, drag tests and general building regulations have also been handed down. The files of the budget department fully document the development of the naval budget, in particular the financing of the fleet building programmes. Here you will also find budget and administrative files on the establishment of the German protectorate Kiautschou as well as on pension and retirement matters of officers, teams and civil servants. Also well preserved are the files of the administrative department, which mainly document catering, clothing and accommodation matters of the navy. Of particular note are the files on numerous foundations for which the Reichsmarineamt was in charge. In connection with the responsibility for food and clothing, extensive series of files on the care of the German population during the war were produced. The traditional files of the news agency contain documents on the economic situation in Germany, the development of shipping, maritime traffic and fleet interests, censorship measures, the collection and distribution of war news and foreign propaganda. An extensive collection of newspaper clippings is also included. Also worth mentioning are the correspondence series on association matters, especially the German Fleet Association. The Nautical Department has files on sea mark and coastal signal matters, cutlery excerpts, travel reports and expeditions. From the shipyard department responsible for the equipment and maintenance of ships, shipyards and vehicles, only a small remainder of files on submarine matters, occasionally also torpedo matters, has been preserved. The departments and departments of the shipyard department responsible for the processing of the submarine system were made independent in 1917 to the submarine office. The documents produced during the short period of its existence reflect the measures taken to promote submarine construction, in particular the material provision during the final phase of the First World War. Worth mentioning here is still material about the planned technical evaluation of war diaries of the submarines. Scope, explanation: Holdings without growth593 lfm24181 AE, approx. 10000 ship drawings/plans (RM 3/12,000-22,600) Citation method: BArch, RM 3/...